Posts made by daggaz

I dont know… I dont get to play too much with a wide variety of people, but I regularly put the hurt on the allies with only a 4 IPC bid, for an artillery in Lybia  -the bomber is just icing on the cake for this fight…  Seems pretty balanced for me there, if I dont make any big mistakes, it just comes down to the ever so slight sway of the luck of the dice over the next turn or two to see where the game will probably be heading.  Anything more than that just seems OP… I would slaughter my opponent with a 10 or 15 IPC bid.

And its not like the opening is being done poorly…  Russia buys inf and a few art or tanks, stomps W. Russia and takes Ukraine usually with just enough force, stacks caucuses and wrussia (i never get that one back), and trades territories using fighters until the brits take norway and ready a stack for karelia.  Pull back from the japs always one country away from the dead zone, stacking in novo for mid game defense.

England usually buys some mix of navy and troops, to put pressure on germanys western front.  USA starts up the shuck shuck.  Standard fair really.  But its simply usually enough for germany to shred africa with minimal investment, hold it until the US is forced to divert troops, at which time Japan has spread the rising sun across the entire swath of the southern pacific and the indian ocean, and is usually able to reclaim the dark continent for axis hands, while at the same time putting the serious hurt into Moscow.

At this point, the game has gone on so long that I fail to see the massive statistical difference you would get from having, say, eight IPC instead of four on G1.  It really just comes down to the tactical errors your opponent makes, and how well you take advantage of them, be they ever so slight.

always happy when i see australia thinned out, makes it that much easier to steal.

But honestly Ive never played too many KJF games so Im not 100% on what I would do… it always seems a bit suboptimal, and with the German tank divisions hammering down on Moscow, far too risky imho.

I just try to get it in my head, the big picture, of the usual situation when the game really tilts.  Usually in KGF, with a fairly balanced game where the allies arent flat out winning, Germany is turtled hard right about the time Japan is sacking Moscow.  So I picture KJF, and I see Japan turtled or probably being sacked considering they are easier to strip of everything but the capital territory, and a WHOLE lot of US boats, and well… a German takeover of All of Europe and Russia, which is… oh god. Its scary.  I think with a solid german presence in eurasia, they will be impossible to get out…

Maybe I should try it just for the hell of it the next few games tho. =)

yeah send the fighter as well to egypt.  You have more than enough firepower to take the gilbratar bb (its almost ímpossible to lose this fight, and incredibly bad odds you lose your bb), but you really need to take out the english in africa and do it convincingly, so that any attempt to retake egypt will be very costly and will completely drain english forces on the japanese front.  Ive had egypt go poorly enough times now to know better.

Interesting idea on the sub in sz 8, jen.  Will have to look at my board some tomorrow, but I will say that I usually hope for a US invasion of algeria turn 1, especially with all my air sitting in strike range (this alone is usually enough deterent that US waits another round for more protection).  I will gladly lose a fighter in order to sink some of the US navy, especially those early trannies and a tasty destroyer.  Just delays them all that much longer, its a cost germany can afford, even if it means not using air to retake russian landgrabs on G2.

As for the bid… hmm we never get to play with more than 7 as getting an extra boat can really change the game…  it might actually be worth it to weaken egypt attack if you can honestly sink all the UK navy on G1.  With two trannies surviving and ready for the med, africa should be retakable even if you lose egypt…  especially since germany could afford the units now that its going to be a few turns before the english even think of hitting norway. Hmm…  Oh well, not like I will ever get to play with an axis bid-boat anyhow. =P

True they can pull out first, making it a bit more of a channel dash, but still isnt that better than just sitting around and waiting to die? ok you can get some use out of the tranny for a few turns in the baltic, but only moving two units at a time is limited.

8 units > 2x 3 units.

Simply put, Japan can more than double your maximum output, all it has to do is is get 4 trannies in its homewaters.

With your strat, you will slow them down a bit, but they will come, and overwhelmingly.  I always smile as Japan when I see an early India IC.  Wipe out the British fleet, consolidate in the inner Japanese seazone, start pumping troops in and take India, even if it takes a few turns.  The Americans will take a bit getting there, so thats ok.  You should be able to knock out India by round three or four at the very latest.  Now Japan owns an IC in the best possible country ever to have one if you are going to invade Russia.  And if the Russians have been helping the UK defend India, then Germany is swarming all over their front, as they are short on men and the UK certainly isnt helping them as much as they could.

Personally I think its a very sound idea with definite implications for a solid German strategy.  It is by far WAY better than just leaving your fleet in the Baltic to eventually be destroyed in say, round three or so depending on allied builds, and it is a good way to attempt the fleet unification without actually building navy (a bad choice for Germany) and which cleverly forces the UK to choose one of several exploitable situations.

How often have people here tried it?  Any problems or are there things you just prefer to do differently for whatever reason? I for one love the bomber build (I usually do it anyways) but this strategy really magnifies the possible usefullness of an extra bomber in the early game, where Germany really needs it most.

This is a great article (sorry imho the only great one) posted by the guys at CSUB, so Im going to repost here.  Hopefully we can get a thread going about who has used it and to what effect. I for one am pretty curious as I think its a remarkably good idea.

Paper Topic
This analysis shows a method for utilizing the Baltic fleet by moving the fleet rather than buying more boats._______________________________________________________

Paper Summary
Germany does not want to spend money in the water if it can be avoided (see Policy Paper 11 - Baltic I). This opening buys no boats but does buy one plane. Here is the rough sketch of the UnBaltic:

Bid: Assume 1 unit in Libya, 1 in Belarus
German Purchase: 1bmr 2tnk 5inf
Combat:
To Amphibious Gibraltar: 1inf 1tra 1btl 3ftr
To Anglo: 1inf 1tnk 1bid 1ftr 1bmr
In Europe: Attack whatever the Russians expose
Non-Combat:
To Z07: 1sub from Z08, 2sub 1tra 1des from Z05
Keep 3inf 2TNK 4ftr in W. Europe.

“But”, says you, “what about the UK fleet in the North Atlantic? What about the Mediterranean destroyer? What about Anglo? If I do this, I don’t FEEL strong. Am I strong?”
Stop asking whiny questions and read the details.

Details
As we covered in the first Baltic Policy Paper, the Germans can’t spend a lot of money in the water and keep up with the Russians for very long. Previous analyses have looked at options to put a minimal investment in the water without diverting too much attention from the Russians. The UnBaltic is the logical extension of that concept. The option covered in this paper attempts to solve the problem of naval/Russian balance by buying a dual-use item that first serves in the water and then serves on land.

The key concepts of this move are:
Cascade dice failure risk (CDFR)
A German United Fleet (GUF) – Covered in previous Policy Papers
A Western Europe air base

Let’s go through the details.

Managing CDFR is the skill of identifying the small percentage outcomes which can have a large impact on the game and either avoiding those situations or forcing your opponent into those situations. When you are looking at the impact of luck, you have to keep in mind that the value of the battle is not just the value of the pieces involved. Sometimes a win or loss has a much greater strategic value than its tactical value. A simple example would be when you are trying to take territory to stop a tank blitz to your capital. Suppose the Russian player needs to simply kill one tank in West Russia and take the land to prevent an overwhelming column of tanks from attacking Moscow. If the Russian player sends 1inf and 1art to kill the lone tank, the Russian player is assuming a risk that goes well beyond the value of the units sent into combat.

From a tactical point of view, the Russian player is risking $7 of gear and the German player is risking $5 of gear. But if the Russian player loses the battle, or simply fails to take the land, then the value of the battle is much greater than the cost of the gear because the Russian player now has to defend Moscow.

In this instance of a battle in West Russia, the Russian player has a scenario that leads to disaster based on the outcome of just a couple of dice. The German player, on the other hand, really doesn’t have much at stake. So unlikely outcome can lead to a very costly Russian remedy while no outcome can lead to a German disaster. The idea that a small failure of dice can lead to a major strategic problem is called Cascade Dice Failure Risk. Managing CDFR means positioning yourself such that your opponent owns significant risk while you own minimal risk.

If you consistently put your opponent in a position where he is vulnerable to CDFR, then in the long run it will win you games. Let’s go apply that to the water.
As stated in the paper summary, the purchase for this move includes 1bmr. The naval moves are taking the Med Fleet to Gibraltar, and sending the Z08 sub as well as the Baltic Fleet to Z07. Z07 now has 1tra 3sub 1des, and the Brits have several options:

1) Ignore the fleet
2) Attack the fleet with air power only
3) Attack the fleet with air power and their own fleet.

If the Brits ignore the fleet then they are exposed to a fairly impressive naval attack. There are two boats off the coast of Gibraltar and there are five boats off the coast of France. Almost anything the Allies put in Z08 will be attacked by all the boats that can reach as well as all the planes. Since a second bomber was purchased, the maximum power would be seven boats and seven planes (assume a fighter used in Anglo could not attack Z08 the next round). Figure that the UK would buy 1car 1tra 2inf, that the US would move up 2tra 1des, and that the Russian sub would block the Med Fleet, and you’re left with this:

Att: 1tra 3sub 1des 5ftr 2bmr = oPunch:32 oCount:12
Def: 5tra 1des 1car 2ftr 1btl = dPunch:23 dCount:11

The median outcome of that battle is four German planes flying away. The average economic benefit of that attack is $30 for the Germans, and most of the German losses were units of little to no value to the Germans. So ignoring the fleet with a defensive build is a bad move.
Your other option for ignoring the fleet is to build your fleet in Z02. There is no risk in this move, but it does mean that the German fleet can slip into the Med. At that point the Med Fleet will become essentially unsinkable, and two transports will perpetually threaten Africa and the Caucasus. In addition, the Germans will have the option of pulling the fleet back out of the Med for a strike on Allied shipping.

So ignoring the fleet is bad, how about attacking the boats with everything? The UK could send 2tra 1btl 2ftr 1bmr against 1tra 3sub 1des. Clearly that is a good fight for the UK, but it has some interesting risks. First off, if the UK gets two hits on the first round, the Germans will lose the transport and the destroyer and submerge the subs. Because you can’t retreat from submerged subs, the UK fleet will be pulled out of range of the American reinforcements. Assuming the Med Fleet is blocked, the UK fleet can now be hit by a max of 3subs 6ftr 2bmr. That means that if the UK wants to attack the Z07 fleet with its own fleet, the UK has to plan on buying a carrier the first round to reinforce the survivors of the naval attack. The Germans would have successfully forced a defensive naval purchase without buying any boats of their own.

Now look at the CDFR implications. Suppose the UK attacks the Z07 fleet and takes three or more hits (this will happen a little more than 20% of the time). Now the German counterattack may be able to wipe out all of the British boats at very little cost to themselves, and the Germans will still have the Med Fleet. As far as risk to the Germans, they aren’t buying any navy, and they don’t particularly care about their starting boats. They are putting much more risk on the British than they are assuming for themselves. The Germans gain the advantage with this move in that they force a defensive naval purchase for the UK and they push the risk onto the British.

What about the third option of an air-force-only attack on the boats? That is not a great fight for the UK. In the first place, in a fight to the death UK wins less than 51% of the battles. The attack is inherently risky. In second place, the normal attacker advantage of being able to call off the attack is largely negated by the presence of subs. If the battle is going well for the UK, the subs will submerge and could slip into the Med on the next round. Worse yet, if the UK bricks on the first round, suddenly the Germans could be in a dominant naval position (that happens 8.33% of the time). Notice the mounting CDFR opportunities in this battle. The UK would be unhappy both if they hit very heavy or if they hit very light.

Is there any situation where the UK can push the CDFR back onto Germany? Not really. The UK could potentially set up a situation where the Germans are enticed into a naval attack with their air force that causes the Germans to lose many planes. But because the Germans don’t much care about the Baltic Navy in this gambit, it will be hard to push them into a position where they risk something they really care about.

The UK player has a choice to make. He can:

A) Expose himself to the dice (CDFR)
B) Plan on making a defensive naval build to start the game or
C) Allow the Baltic Fleet to slip away.

The German player is probably fine with all three of these options, so the UK player should select the counter that best fits the rest of his opening.

UnBaltic and The German bomber

There are not many instances where Germany gets a second bomber on the board. The typical German player will make land-intensive purchases along with a small investment in the Baltic and perhaps in the Med. Since Germany is usually in a defensive position, an additional gray bomber is an unaffordable luxury. Because this scenario looks to punish sloppy or unlucky play in the water, however, buying a bomber makes sense. Once the water has been resolved one way or the other, the bomber still has a great deal of utility.

Typically WEU becomes an air base for Germany. Swapping land with Russians often involves bouncing many fighters between WEU and KAR, and sending one bomber and ground troops to UKR/BAL/BEL. Having a second bomber means you can push infantry into swap zones with air support for each territory. Fighters still go to Karelia and one bomber can go to each of the other two typical swap zones. This will save logistical problems with fighters and prevents having to use artillery or tanks to take land.

The second bomber also has an interesting impact on Allied shipping lanes. Having two bombers stationed in Western Europe can cause significant havoc for the Allies in setting up their early supply chain. The Germans may never actually attack in the water, but the Allied player will have to be careful with his capital ships to protect the western end of his supply chain. Unprotected transports in Z02 are quite exposed.

Also, as the game reaches mid-to-late stages, the can-opener value of the bombers can be quite useful. The Germans may be able to open up a tank path to Moscow for the Japanese.

Finally, having a second “4” throwing in a large land battle against the Russians is always nice. It’s not as nice as having three more tanks, mind you, but remember that the money you spent on the bomber was taken from the naval budget, not the ground budget. Instead of building transports or a carrier, you built a dual-use item.

FAQ

1. In the case of submerged subs in Z07, how about attacking them with an American bomber and an American fighter that lands on a carrier built in Z08?

This is the type of move you would consider with a defensive-minded UK plan. It was left out of the main paper for the sake of simplicity because it is a bit more complicated than it looks at first. Consider the implication of three sub hits on the first round of the UK attack (1 in 27 chance). Two of the hits will remove boats, meaning you may not be able to just lose a UK fighter or bomber to absorb those hits. You also have to consider that the American Air Force may miss, and the subs will just re-submerge. And only in rare cases will the American kill more than one sub. CDFR is still significant problem.

2. Why not do an UnBaltic opening that builds only ground troops?

Without building the bomber, the Allies will be into Europe almost immediately. There certainly are variations of the UnBaltic opening that skip the bomber, but you will find that the Allies have a very rapid buildup in Europe. Buying the bomber manages to leverage your navy without spending money in the water. Even if it never attacks boats, the bomber will be useful in land battles, undoubtedly providing value every round.

3. In the paper summary you specifically mention that you should have two tanks in Western Europe. Why?

You have two transports available. If the UK loses their fighters and you keep your transports alive, you want to have the threat of invading London. The odds are very small that you would ever actually get to do the invasion, but you should at least threaten the invasion to force a response. Remember, you could have as much as 2inf 2tnk 5ftr 2bmr 1btl for the invasion. The chances of a viable invasion are small, but the prize is far too large to ignore the trivial setup necessary to maximize this opportunity. Make sure you are in a position to punish any mistakes or to capitalize on any bad dice. If it doesn’t cost you much, set up a CDFR possibility!

4. Won’t the UK bomber and destroyer attack the German Med Fleet?

Run that battle in the simulator and you’ll see that the battle is not very favorable for the UK. It is possible that the UK player would consider trying to battle for one round and then pulling off it goes badly, but under what circumstances is that the best use of the bomber? In almost every set up that bomber will be wanted for either Z07 or Anglo.

5. The UnBaltic is essentially a defensive German opening, so why does the recommended buy include 2tnk?

The full answer is too long to go into in this paper, but the short answer is that it has to do with a counter to the Russians. Buying 1bmr 8inf save $1 is fine, as is 1bmr 7inf 1art. It depends on your overall strategy for the Germans.

Wrap Up
The UnBaltic is not a crane-kick, but it does force some interesting choices on the British player. In some instances involving CDFR, the German player will gain a decisive early naval advantageat little cost to the ground game. And who doesn’t love having a second bomber?

Version and Unresolved Issues
1v0 Date: 1/8/2008
Unresolved issues: NONE! //On a side note, rather than take the smug assuredness that their are ZERO zilch nada problems with this idea, how about we leave it to debate and good old rigorous experimentation??  I’m curious to see people’s takes on this one.

Hey thanks for the articles Jen, I appreciate the effort on your part.  =)

I suppose this is as good a thread as any to discuss them, so here’s my take.

Meh.  Most of them are either for beginners (like basic statistical breakdowns, or how Germany should turtle), or they are in the realm of “yeah this would work maybe once in my group, maybe. And I had better get the opponents a bit drunk first.”  (canadian shield and landbridge etc.) That or they were seriously shortsighted, looking at immediate IC/gain/loss effects of strategies rather than the big picture.  Typos and flat out obvious mistakes were numerous, it would help the authors to actually proof-read their own material.  The interjected comedy was humorous at times, but more often came off a bit forced, and really was just out of place most of the time.  I’m reading strategy, why is half the pdf about Mr. T?  I could really care less, I stopped reading halfway thru when I realized the attempt at explaining the benefits of tanks was going to really stink.  Boredom and the gag reflex trump banal curiousity every time.

There was one article that stood out above the rest, which was the one about the Un-Baltic.  This one really broke thru the box and gave the best possible solution I have yet seen for an otherwise tricky dillema for the Germans; I am definitely going to try this out the next few games.  I especially liked the progressive thinking as to forcing the UK into bad fights which usually in the game any player can choose to avoid without serious consequences, and also the effects of luck on small battles.  This is a really smart article.

That said, it amazes me that no less than three articles were published which focused solely on builds that absolutely cripple the Germans in not just the long run, but the short run as well.   And these articles are presented as a fundamental strategy. (??!) When I first came onto the canadian shield etc ideas, I thought, ok, thats an interesting threat/deterrent which could change the game.  It doesnt take too long to realize that the Russians will take FULL advantage, and that it requires minimal maneuvering from the other allies to negate this massive IPC and strategic investment.  Like I said, it would work once against somebody not paying too much attention to the board, so get them drunk first if you can.  Unbaltic should be the alpha and the omega as far as German naval builds go, in regards to CSUB articles.  Dont delete the others, but they should be side-shelved into “interesting gambits,” not mainstream strategy.

Finally, at the end of each article there is a small conclusion about the shortcomings therein.  90% of the time this was something like, “None! There are no shortcomings or missing ideas or mistakes. This idea is absolutely perfect!”

Wow. What an arrogant crock of siht.  It doesn’t take a leap of imagination to figure out what kind of people tag their own articles like this, or even who they are.  Big surprise there, really. /sarcasm

In conclusion, most of the articles are more or less a waste of time unless you are really new to the game and especially strategy games in general.  If so, by all means read them all and absorb what you can.  For advanced players, I wouldn’t bother too much with CSUB except for the UnBaltic move, which I will post here on another thread, as I am interested to hear some of this board’s veterans’ take on it.

1. AAR
2. Classic, 2 ed.

There is such a gulf between the two that its almost not worth comparing them to me.  My old game sits in its box and we wont touch it even if we want to play A+A, there is just no reason for it anymore.  I think I am going to just scrounge the units out so that we can replace eventual losses in the new board.

I have no idea, Ive never played anniversary (btw check out the forum section on this game, its at the top of the list).

I will say Revised so far is like a million times better than classic 2.ed.  It is more balanced, it is far, far more dynamic, and nearly every unit has a definite beneficial reason to purchase it.

Anniversary seems likes its even more so, with extra teams thrown in plus a sorta 2fer1 thing, in that you can start with one of two setups. (tho the boards seem to indicate that the first setup is highly imbalanced towards the allies.)

My advice?  You should buy anniversary and get a friend to buy revised. Or the other way around.  :evil:

I agree with Spartan about Germany’s priorities.

Germany’s main priority is to take Moscow.  This may not be feasible, so it is acceptable that they severely weaken Moscow for a Japanese overthrow.  Those planes do little to help this, they are instead a (possibly major) hindrance to allied shipping.  That is a tertiary priority. The secondary priority is to take and hold Africa.  So this strategy, tho not broken, is absolutely not optimal.

I also make a huge tank build on G1 if Russia gets bad dice.  You wont have a lot of time to take advantage before Russia starts pumping out more inf and starts getting her first reinforcements, so dash dash dash! Its ok if you lose some armor, Germany needs to expand fast to help make up the money and put the heat on Moscow.  This should really help the Japs make a solid push at least up to Novo in the early part of the game.

With Russia on full defensive, Germany has plenty of time to build troops for the Fatherland, really with an income over 40+, it only takes 2 turns to get enough men to protect the core countries for a long time.  And if you are stacking up Karelia (with enough tanks its totally feasible), then you are probably holding Norway and as well you are using your main objective tools to simultaneously achieve your 3rd objective, stopping allied reinforcements.

That’s a lot more optimal.

That said, in a more normal game I do like to beef up the German airforce, albeit more slowly.  A bomber G1, a fig here and there afterwards.  Suddenly only having one BB to protect those 3 trannies when UK is thinking of snagging Norway in R3 or so is not looking like a smart move at all.

As for Japan, I always save 1 ipc from the axis bid for them.  2 trannies and an IC is just too good of a start.  Yes “technically” its not optimal when you consider the boats are cheaper and move tanks just as easily, but the point is having an early and advanced front.  The change in the power dynamic is maybe hard to measure quantitatively, but it is definitely worth it.  Then I build a trannie a turn until I am up to about four or five or so, depending on what exactly I am doing.  Tho if the allies made some big KJF moves and got real good dice, I might hold off on that IC purchase until Im sure I can hold it…

Infantry push is still important, but it is not the is all has all that it used to be. As well, you tend to not see the wars of attrition either… you know, the giant stacks of infantry where nobody will ever really move because its just too even.

Instead, tanks are far more viable as a purchase, which really opens up the board considering their greater mobility and increased defensive power as well.  On top of this, if you do have two large, opposed infantry stacks, then one side can really tip the scales by adding a fair amount of artillery to the mix.  Suddenly he has doubled his infantries attacking power, not just gonna sit around in the trenches anymore, are we?

The extra sea zones have helped immensely, it really takes the pressure off of germany (the classic US shuckshuck was impossibly broken), tho the allies can still set up a shuck shuck with relative impunity, it just takes longer and requires more boats.  Offsetting this, the saharan desert makes it a bit tougher for Germany to take Africa, but as well it makes it harder for Allied cleaner troops to get back to the main theater of war.

Playing Russia Restricted would end with Moscow’s quick demise, you definitely want to and need to attack as Russia, who coincidentally has a real game going on this time, not just “I buy eight men and stack them in Karelia.”  Tank buys and even a fighter or two are absolutely not uncommon for Russian builds.

As for Japan… hmm I think its the one country the least affected by the changes, tho the Royal Navy certainly can and should be used to hamper their momentum.  The extra russian zones dont do a whole lot to slowing down the Jap advance, if you are swift and your opponent is dumb, you can be on Moscows door in like five rounds, as usual.  What slows the Japs down this time is the fact that Moscow has teeth and can use them, sending tank squads against advanced and isolated japanese infantry divisions (check to see if your competitor pushes too far into sing without reinforcements after taking china, a common mistake), and eventually turning the entire might of the Red Army eastwards.  I like to stage in Novo, blocking all the routes with deadzones, and hopefully making up for lost territories by land grabs in eastern germany.

As for bids, yeah people still bid axis in general.  Its from maybe 5 to 10 ipc, tho 6-8 is def the most common it seems after reading these boards.  Really depends on your skills and those of your opponent.  I routinely thrash the allies with as little as a 0ipc bid (tho its nice to get at least 4 ipc for one inf and 1 buck to japan), whereas im not having too much trouble stomping the fascists into the mud with the same bids…

1a, correct.
b, its in the rule book just look up destroyers.  sorry dont have the manual on me and well, havent used destroyers vs subs enough to know it offhand.  Im pretty sure tho that if your sub is successfully attacked by another sub, (no destroyers in that battle), then no you dont get to hit back.
c, subs submerge at the end of any round, after both the attacker and the defender have fired.  If enemy destroyers are present, you cannot submerge until those destroyers have been …destroyed. =)

2. correct

3. artillery is just like an infantry, except it attacks on a 2 instead of a one. As well, each piece of artillery will raise the attack of 1 infantry to a 2 as well if they are used in a battle at the same time.

Artillery are kind of a neat idea, but I tend not to use them unless I happen to have an extra buck lying around.  Usually stick to inf and arm mixes, tho art can be very useful if you have large stacks deadzoning near eachother, for instance on the russian/german front.  Here it can really help one side make a stronger push with their inf stack.

4. You can place newly made or existing fighters directly onto a newly made carrier as it is placed. What you cannot do is park an existing carrier in a seazone off an IC, and dump newly made fighters onto it each turn, effectively giving you a free move point.  You have to pay for that bonus by actually building the carrier.

5. Havent gotten to play Anniversary yet, but we are going to buy it soon.  I know there is a new Axis team, the Italians.  And America has control over new chinese units, tho I wonder if there is any big difference there other than that the units have a different color… tho I suspect perhaps the incomes are seperate as well, just american controlled.  Dont know. =)

I actually have registered to it, just a really long long time ago, so of course I forgot my yahoo account stuff.

Mostly its just cuz its a pain in the arse to go thru all that junk even if it only takes a few minutes- which leads right to my other point.  Anybody can sign up, repeatedly, with fake accounts in no time at all and spam and flame and generally be a huge pain in the butt for the mods, so its not like its that huge of a help.  It certainly wont keep the “riffraff” out, only dissuade them somewhat.

Anyhow, like I said already, its just tedious and I will forget in no time anyhow as I dont use yahoo so I will forget that email account. And who wants yahoo tracking you around? (yeah ok use fake info but still.) And all just to get access to a few pdf files?

If it was my site, I would have the files freely available, and only require registering to post on the forum, to keep out spambot scripts.  Yould still have to actually mod the board tho, cuz spammers will always get thru, not to mention guys who jump in and flame posters for no good reason except their panties are in a knot, scaring new members off the board and that sorta thing.  Its highly annoying and beyond stupid, but thats the internet for ya.

We just wrap ours up in a piece of tinfoil.  Its not exactly pretty, or organized as far as the different units go (but really guys, how hard is it to pick a tank out??), but it keeps the countries seperated and the upshot is that you can easily replace the containers when they get worn out.

J1 IC is too early, unless you got a 1dollar bid and bought two trannies as well.

If you are building a destroyer each round, I am going to freaking rejoice as the allies. WHat a collosal waste.  I will maybe build a sub each round as well as USA, just to unnerve you enough to hopefully spur your dubious purchases onwards.  Like you said, if Japan should ignore USAs fleet, why wont it work both ways? Its not like you are going to capture any territory, EVER, with a fleet of destroyers.

As well, only 1 inf per turn is far, far too little for Japan.  You need to be able to hold that land.  An IC in India and Singhai can chug out more tanks than you can, and they can afford them.  Plus they can hold them no problem if you are building destroyers instead of infantry.  But thats not even necessary if you are going to ignore India.

Why?  Cuz your attacking force is weaker than the force I am dumping into Russia.  Caucuses alone can be fortified with 2 tanks and a man, plus allied fighters, each and every turn.  And Russia WILL have the money to spare if you arent even going to make a bid for those measly eastern territories, which DO add up.  And thats just Russian ground troops.  USA and England will definitely be shucking loads of troops into Norway and down the same route you are trying to take, only, they are doing it with more men.  Plus, when the shuck really gets going, Germany is forced to fall back somewhat from the eastern front, as those supply lines can just as easily (and usually do) invade France at a point.

In the mean time, Russia can easily hold out against the Germans and even turn their eyes Eastwards.

Not to mention, my typical E1 moves involve harrassing and sinking as much Japanese navy as possible. Are you really going to ignore all those boats?  Hope so.

Sorry man, but thats gotta be one of the more subprime strategies Ive heard for Japan in a while.  Drop the destroyer purchases, and youve got a much stronger shot at making a good punch, but still theres no reason to take every single IPC from the allies as Japan while you can.  Which you MUST do because yeah, you are being outspent bigtime from the getgo, and thats without worthless builds.

Ok so just checked out the tourney rules with limited SBR and we decided to invoke them in our games, as yeah, otherwise it is too overwhelming a strategy.

Still, having just borne the brunt of it as the Germans, I can say that its still a good option on top of everything else they are doing.  Really just hitting Berlin with two bombers a turn each country can take the puff right out of any german balloons.

The worst part of it was, I never shot any of his SBR bombers down, whereas he nailed me three times.  Blood begins to boil.

Hey thanks a ton, Jen! =)  Now for my second request, if you could just move to Copenhagen?  Because there are simply zero hawt girls over here who play Axis and Allies (or DnD for that matter, noticed your sig). Also I remember you posted once that “There is NEVER enough beer” which is enough points to warrant an immediate marriage proposal, even over the internets!  8-)

Haha, no but I will definitely send you an email when I get home. And thanks again, Im definitely curious to see what’s been posted over there.

Had a fun game, so I thought I would share this one with the board…  This is off memory, so it might not be exactly correct…

Won Axis with a 6 IPC bid. Put a tank in Libya, gave 1 ipc to Japan.  (Both of us feel that an extra tranny is just really powerful in the hands of the Axis…)

Russia bought 3 men, 3 tanks.  Took West Russia with a huge stack, tried to take Belo with minimal forces and a fig, but I lucked out and held the country.  :evil:  Player also pulled out of Bury, stacking troops up just behind for some reason.  Japan was happy.

Germany bought 1 bomber, bunch of men.  Did fully standard moves to take Egypt, sink all med fleets, landing most of the airforce in France and stacking in E. Eur.  Kept the inf in Norway for now to hinder any British landings in R1.  Without a naval build, the Baltic fleet is boned.  Use the tranny for what its worth and hope you nail a plane when they finally come in to sink your ships.

England was played terribly, they ignored Japan completely, even removing men from India and sending the fleet to retake Egypt (lost my two tanks), which normally is ok but there was nothing to keep the Japs out in this case… Australian tranny took two men east. Submarine forgot to attack the other sub, so instead sailed thru to hawaii to join the Americans.  The bomber was sent to Egypt as well, and landed unprotected in Ethiopia.

-This is imho the most game-breaking move for the Allies.  They just cannot afford to leave the Japs unmolested.  I prefer a full out assault myself.  Send all the ships, not just the destroyer, in to kill that tranny, forcing the Japs to contend with a navy in their backyard swimming pool.  Try to land the British bomber within five zones of sz60. Send the sub and the plane against the jap sub.  Noncombat the tranny to the Hawaiin fleet, for god’s sake, dont make Australia any easier for the Japs.  Russia should mass troops in Bury.  Now the Japs are in trouble.  They have to have a capital ship to defend any trannies they must build in R1 as their are now multiple threats on their seazones.  All out attack on China is hard, because there is fleet threatening as well which will demand ships and planes, and then they risk English and Russian attacks on Fic and Man, respectively.  Pearl might need to be ignored completely.  Basically a KJF opening strat, but you dont have to sink into it with the IC purchases in Sing and India.-

Jap had a great first turn.  Bought 2 trannies and 1 IC with the extra ipc.  Mutilated Pearl Harbor, even with the extra sub.  Took India on J1 (!!!) with my not-killed tranny and a well placed Battleship shot.  Now I have a tran, a BB, and an AC with a fig to defend against reprisal, plus two men stationed in India. Put one man into Bury since it was empty (and please please let Russia send their troops forward to die) and stacked Man.  Took China with almost maximum force, leaving a few men in Man for the Russian front. Place the IC in Man, collect 36ipc.

US1 they bought the prerequisite trannies and troops, moving things into position for the first drop into UK, keeping boats out of harms way for now.  Pearl was too well blockaded, so they ignored the counterattack.

R2 bought men and two tanks.  This time they took Ukrain (it was deadzoned) with minimum force as well as Belo.  Stack is reinforced in W. Rus.

G2 bought a med tranny and some tanks and rest men.  My bomb in Lybia took out the Eng bomb, flying back to S. Eur I think.  The new Bomber assisted in retaking Egypt with the original Algerian troops plus 1 tank 1 inf from S. Eur, and the BB shot.  Ukr and Belo are traded back with minimum loss of life, Karelia taken with min. force, two figs stack in E. Eur and a few men are sent to replace them in France.

-I played the Germans well through out the game, but I really feel they weren’t aggresive enough still.  I dont like trading Ukraine, its too much money for Russian hands, and besides, I think it is better to force the Russians to trade lots of men on the front in the first few rounds, as Germany is outproducing them here and they are alone for now.  Still, it is so easy to stack defensively with Russia.  Damn they get a lot of men… So I was a bit more conservative with my attacks, using airforce and keeping a deadly threat of counterattack instead.-

England 2, he moved his BB and 3 trannies and dumped men directly into Karelia retaking it, forgoing Norway.  Moved figs into West Russia.  Merged southern fleet south of India and East of Australia. Began to sweat a bit.  Think he bought a replacement bomber here. heheh.

J2, Buy another trannie, an AA, 2 tanks, bunch of men.  India trannie take 2 men from Borneo and hits australia, with the BB and AC.  Hawaiin fleet moves so that a plane can help and jump ships, as well as being two zones from India and next to Borneo.  Now I own Australia, India can be easily retaken if Eng moves there, and Borneo is a tempting 4ipc deadzone.  I was really hoping he would fall for Borneo.  :evil:  Rest of ships merge off of Buryatia and stack it with everything that can reach.  One tank blitzes thru and takes that far NE russian territory.  Worth the loss if Russia sends men in to kill it and weakens their front.  Sing was taken with 2 inf and 3 figs, with 1 inf surviving.  Tanks and AA put down in Man.  Collect 39 ipc.

US2.  More trannies, more troops.  Shucks a bunch of men into UK thru sz 8. Completely oblivious to the growing Japanese presence far across the ocean.  Was really glad here he didnt take Algeria, which he really, really should have.  Allies MUST contest Africa, and I feel US is best for the job.

R3, more troops, more of the same. Trades Ukr and Belo, stacks W. Russia.

G3. Fun fun fun.  Buy 2 figs, men and a tank.  Send two bombs and the 2 figs from E. Eur and sink the BB and 3 tran, losing you guessed it, 2 figs.  Nor inf and 2 inf tranned from Berlin hit Karelia with air support, wipe it out but fail to take the territory.  American boats I think are too far away (dont have map on me now) to retake Nor, but if they did move further in it would break his supply line so great.  Egypt forces burst into Africa and over the canal, claiming four territories uncontested.  Drop another inf and tank into Egypt just to be sure.  Ukr and Belo are traded back, but its pissing me off the Russians keep ending turn with 24+ ipc.  Also Germany is getting SBR’d some by US and UK, so grrrr!  :x

E3.  Rebuys boats!  :-P :mrgreen:  Troops are stuck on England for now.  SBR’s Germany.  India fleet heads to S. Africa, drops off two men, ignores Borneo and India.

J3.  Australian BB’s and tranny take New Zealand, One AC and destoyer head towards home via FiC.  Further troop stacking in Bury, Russia needs to leave or they die.  IC in India. Collect 40 ipc.

US3.  Begins funneling troops seriously into UK and E. Canada.  I can feel the invasion coming.  Trannies are not set up optimally tho, its more like one big push every two turns rather than a steady stream.  SBR’s Germany. (damn this hurts, thank god I have africa).

R4. Retrades Ukr and Belo. Blitzes a tank into Norway.  Pulls troops away from Bury. Attacks the one man in Sing, retaking the territory for no good reason.

G4. Start moving troops in on S. Afr, but dont take it yet as England dropped a fig there, waiting for more inf.  Tran 1 inf 1 art plus a fig and retake Norway, smiting that tank.  Retake Ukr and Belo, walk 1 inf into kar.

UK4. Bunch of figs from W. Rus sink my baltic fleet, I dont even hit a single plane.  2 Bombers hit France with a like 1 tank and 6 inf, I have 8 inf and I think 3 figs defending, maybe it was four tho.  Nail a bomber with AA, lose two inf, and wipe out the UK beach force completely, bomber retreats to UK with one tank left to die at the hands of the Germans.  S. Afr Fleet moves around the cape towards the med.

J4. Fun.  Take Hawaii with New Zealand fleet, total of 3 inf 1 art 2 tran (1 from Japan, I built it in sz 61 the turn before) 1 AC 1 fig 2 BB.  3 tran from bury take 3 inf 3 arm and take W. Can. with ease.  Hollywood is empty at this point, tho there are some tanks and men that could reach me from DC and E. Can.  Take another two Rus territories, closing in on Moscow, Novo stack cant touch me as tanks are too far away.  Retake Sing with some tanks and planes and 1 inf from china.  Dead dead russians. Collect income, its over 42 now, so I am making more than the US.  Germany as well is hitting like 46 or something… Tanks in Man, Inf in India, shuffle shuffle shuffle.

US4.  Panic.  Forgets he can attack the men in W. Can (tho it would have been an even fight with what could reach) and instead invades France heavily, wipes out my airforce. =(  Doesnt have enough troops tho to hold it and no reinforcements for another two turns now so I am glad.  Stacks men in Hollywood and actually moves troops BACK from E. Can.  Axis rejoice.  Africa is still uncontended.

R5.  Moves whole stack, Caucuses and W. Russia into Ukr ???!.  They should have done that at least one round earlier, if at all….  Trades the same damn territories again.  Buying all men now. There is a frightening stack of men in the Ukraine.

G5.  Retrades, tho barely thank god for the extra bombers.  Leaves a thin veil of troops, 1 inf each, in the entire eastern front.  All tanks blitz France along with entire Berlin inf stack.  Russian presence is frightening, but I can deadzone from Berlin in time.  Total devestation of US troops, Eng cannot hope to reclaim next turn.  Move fleet up and take Madagascar, troops massed on S. Afr for total victory next turn.  Build inf in Berlin but not as many as I would like do to brutal SBRs.

UK 5.  SBR. Move fleet further towards Med. The fig flies out to the AC as S. Afr is a gonner now.  Dumps troops in E. Eur thru the baltic.

Jap 5. Use 2 inf from Hawaii and BBs to take Alaska, 1 inf 1 arm wait on the boat at sea. (their job is done now).  Takes all the russian territories east of Moscow.  Stack of planes, tanks and inf building up withing striking distance of Moscow.

US5. Retakes Alaska (I wanted them to get this far, why I left W. Can totally empty) by blitzing some tanks in.  Starts landing more troops in UK for another assault on France. Puts destroyers into Baltic to guard UK ships.  Amazingly he empties LA…

R6.  Takes the country next to S. Eur instead of stacking with English in E. Eur.  Builds some men in Caucuses and Moscow.  Its over for Russia…

G6.  Takes S. Africa with force, landing Mad inf on the west Coast with the tranny.  A small strike team (inf, bomber, art and tanks) hits Eng stack in E. Eur, reducing them to one tank before retreating to Berling.  Everything but 11 inf and five tanks in France stack in Berlin.

U6.  Fleet moves towards N. Atl.  Drops troops into Norway and takes it, finally.  They dont have enough to really hurt Germany and dont try to invade France.

J6.  Total annhilation of every Russian territory up to Moscow and the Cuacuses.  Large Stack is waiting to sack the Capital on the next turn.  Enough troops to overwhelm Caucuses as well.  Retake Alaska using BBs and another 2 inf, AND I drop two men into LA as the US left it empty!!  Japan is way over the 50 ipc mark now and owns basically everything within reach.

US6. Takes back Alaska and LA, but whats the point.  Drops a pile of guys into Normandy, but the Germans hold the position handily.

R7.  Moves the Stack into E. Eur… I really dont know what he is doing at this point, I would have taken S. Eur at least, but it is pointless because it is absolutely over for Moscow.

G7.  Takes Brazil! Begins walking troops back across africa.  Stacks men in Berlin. Turtling, but we are solid now.

UK7.  Drops a bunch of guys into E. Eur.  pointless now.

J7.  Finally.  Take caucuses with only 3 inf, 3 arm, against 6 inf.  Total massacre, didnt lose a single man.  Full scale invasion of Moscow, which is severely undermanned. Lose all my infantry, but Moscow is sacked.  There is no army which can counterattack this turn.  Germany is turtled in Berlin and will lose the beach next turn, but it doesnt matter, no chance of actually sacking the capital and nothing can stop the Japs at this point.  Russia is routed and soon Germany will retake the beaches, as well she owns all of Africa and Brazil so is still taking full income.  It is game over, the Allies surrender.

I coulda swore it was less rounds, i might have added one on accident, but maybe it was seven.  All in all some solid axis expansion, with enough pestering to disrupt an already sub-optimal alliled supply train, it was game over from the beginning, really. =)

I think Germany could have done better with less air and more ground troops, but still was able to hold out well even at the end, there was no true risk of losing Berlin.  Still, would like to work on a more aggresive ground war against Russia.

So what do you guys think? Sorry bout the length…

Wha??

Where in my reply does it say that I don’t understand something?  If you think I don’t understand the game, you are sorely mistaken and as well, have completely misunderstood the point of my post.

If you think I don’t understand how to create an email account…erm… you can just get bent.

At any rate, I know I am not alone with my original complaint, because I found a post on page fifty on these forums, by one of the mods here, where he posts quite a few of the caspian sub articles for precisely the reasons I complained about; simply that alot of people cannot be bothered to sign up for yet another email account just to look at a webpage, especially when they are required to surrender personal information to a third party in order to do so.

If you want to actually make yourself useful, then please by all means, post some caspian sub articles in this thread or a new one.  If you just want to sit back and try to act smug while flame-baiting and making a total a** of yourself, then get a life.

rolls eyes