Posts made by Enigmatic_Decay

I like adding an IC in France on the second turn and re-enforcing the hell out of it. I buy mainly men the first turn and help support a France defense by landing fighters (German and Italian) there to ward off any potential early allied invasion. I keep putting out 6 men a turn there so that by UK3/US3 or later when the allies could launch a fair sized invasion I have way too big a force that they can’t really take it over!

I’m still curious as to how the Allies can win? with NO and tech on what are some of the strategies that you’ve used to ensure victory and what did the axis player do?

In all my games the axis player attacks deep enough into Russia to get their NO’s and then adapts a massive deffensive position and waits for Japan to grow unstopable. The allies can’t even threaten europe because once Germany adapts a deffensive strategy there numbers of men, fighters and tanks are just too much for the allies to be able to invade or hold any ground in europe and they can’t seriously threaten Berlin.

Ideas?

I use it to threaten the italian fleet, not much of a threat I know but???
It can also be used in conjunction with your british/us fleet as cannon fodder!

Now we’re getting somewhere, I still think 6 transports might be too much in one turn but the complex idea along with maybe a few transports a turn might work and the odd warship.

It will allow you to capture africa, threaten the caucasus and potentially threaten England. Now you’ve got some defense for your fleet with the Italian support.

This could be effective

I agree with you Unknown. Would be fun to try but I think an experienced player could easily thwart it.

I firmly believe that any major German naval build is a complete waste of time, unless it is done after and only after hevily fortifying the Eastern front. And then only to support Italy in the mediteranian little by little!

How? I’ve never see the allies win!

Where, might I ask is the reinforcements to take Karelia? If you bought a navy in the first turn you’ll have no reinforcements to hit Karelia with and you don’t seem to anticipate that while you may take out those 7 Russian infantry on RD. 1, they will more than likely cause you a few casualties as well.

If you think you can transport them, your wrong because if I’m the allies I hit you with a one two assult that wipes out your navy including your transports before you can reinforce or move it

I like the fact that you’ve been constructing a different German strategy than we’re used to, however I think your assuming too little in terms of an allied response to your G1 moves.

This makes no sense, the numbers don’t even add up!
And even if they did, you must be playing the most rookie allied players I’ve ever seen!

I’d like to try and maintain a sub fleet of between 6 and 12 subs they work well for me.
Pity I couldn’t try that strategy against you sometime Jen as I might be able to show you how it can work or vice versa. I’ve read a lot of your posts and you are quite knowledgeable but I do have to disagree with you here. Cheers!

If you did mention it I’m sorry as I did not see it!
Either way I think this argument is still too based on hypothetical theory and not on practicality (no offense intended)
I for one, would never let my sub fleet get creamed for nothing and I feel that more players than not wouldn’t either.
Subs in the right hands can be very deadly weapons. In a game I played as the axis last week I baited an American player into attacking a fleet of subs, and set him up so I could destroy his fleet, he wasn’t a very good player but he was still left with the problem of whether or not to leave my subs in which case I would have been able to re-enforce and attack with them, or he could have attacked them and become vulnerable to my main strike force, which he did and lost very poorly.

Furthermore, I agree with the split sub theory as I think that a smart sub player doesn’t have a large stack of subs (unless using the cannon fodder defense theory) but many smaller stacks spread out.

First off let me introduce myself, though I am new to this board as a member I have observed it for a while and I am rather experienced with A&A having played many versions over the last 15 years.

This being said I thought I would jump into this topic as I noticed that something hasn’t been mentioned yet.

If the hypothetical multiple subs vs multiple bombers and a destroyer theory is further examined we can safely say that all subs will not be lost, in fact if we compare an equal ipc value say 1dd 8ipc’s and 6 bombers 72ipcs for a total of 80 ipc’s vs: 13 subs 78ipc’s chances are that somewhere between 7 and 9 subs should still remain.

Let me explain:
First the dd rolls, 33%  chance of a hit
next the 6 bombers roll with the odds stating that 4 bombers will hit
So we’re looking at 7 hits max with the odds saying more likely 4-5

during the counterattack 13 subs fire back, again, we’ll go with the odds here and say 2 hits. Since the subs can’t hit the bombers the destroyer MUST be chosen as a casualty leaving lets say 8 subs and 6 bombers left. Since the subs can’t hit the bombers and the bombers can’t hit the subs without a destroyer, the battle is over and 8 subs remain.

Yes the sub owner did suffer a greater loss in ipc value but the bomber owner better hope he has another DD or that his ships are not in range of the remaining subs or else…… then again this is a hypothetical battle and I know that many players (myself included) who buy subs would not put themselves in this position unless there was a massive reward (a nice big fleet without a DD to hit) or something else worth losing subs for.

I find subs really useful and frequently buy a lot of them usually with great results.

Cheers,

Enigmatic_Decay