Posts made by farmboy

The US turn is coming. I edited a move. I didn’t want to leave fighters on the carrier but on the adjoining territory (East US). I can change that back no problem. Wasn’t sure what the norms were around those kinds of edits.

TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition, version: 3.9

Game History

Round: 1

Purchase Units - Americans
            Americans buy 2 carriers, 1 destroyer and 1 transport; Remaining resources: 5 PUs;

Combat Move - Americans

Non Combat Move - Americans
            1 battleship, 1 carrier, 1 cruiser and 1 destroyer moved from 10 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
            1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 10 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
            1 fighter moved from Philippines to Guam
            1 destroyer moved from 35 Sea Zone to 23 Sea Zone
            1 submarine moved from 35 Sea Zone to 42 Sea Zone
            1 infantry moved from Central United States to Eastern United States
            1 fighter moved from Eastern United States to 101 Sea Zone
            1 fighter moved from Western United States to 101 Sea Zone
            1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from Western United States to 10 Sea Zone
            1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 10 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
            1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from 26 Sea Zone to Hawaiian Islands
            1 destroyer moved from 26 Sea Zone to 25 Sea Zone
            1 transport moved from 26 Sea Zone to 10 Sea Zone
            1 bomber moved from Central United States to Hawaiian Islands
            1 armour moved from Central United States to Eastern United States
            2 mech_infantrys moved from Central United States to Eastern United States
            1 mech_infantry moved from Central United States to Western United States

Place Units - Americans
            1 carrier, 1 destroyer and 1 transport placed in 101 Sea Zone
            1 carrier placed in 10 Sea Zone
            Turning on Edit Mode
            EDIT: Removing units owned by Americans from 101 Sea Zone: 2 fighters
            EDIT: Adding units owned by Americans to Eastern United States: 2 fighters
            EDIT: Turning off Edit Mode

Turn Complete - Americans
            Americans collect 52 PUs; end with 57 PUs

triplea_40407_Ame1.tsvg

TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition, version: 3.9

Game History

Round: 1

Purchase Units - Russians
            Russians buy 1 artillery and 11 infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs;

Combat Move - Russians

Non Combat Move - Russians
            3 infantry moved from Ukraine to Western Ukraine
            2 infantry moved from Bessarabia to Western Ukraine
            2 infantry moved from Caucasus to Rostov
            1 armour and 1 mech_infantry moved from Volgograd to Bryansk
            1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Russia to Novgorod
            2 aaGuns, 1 armour, 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 mech_infantry moved from Russia to Bryansk
            6 infantry moved from Novgorod to Baltic States
            1 infantry moved from Belarus to Baltic States
            1 artillery moved from Novgorod to Baltic States
            1 infantry moved from Archangel to Novgorod
            3 infantry moved from Vyborg to Karelia
            2 aaGuns moved from Novgorod to Baltic States
            2 infantry moved from Eastern Poland to Western Ukraine
            6 infantry moved from Buryatia to Yakut S.S.R.
            1 aaGun moved from Sakha to Buryatia
            1 aaGun and 6 infantry moved from Sakha to Buryatia
            6 infantry moved from Amur to Buryatia

Place Units - Russians
            1 artillery and 2 infantry placed in Ukraine
            3 infantry placed in Novgorod
            6 infantry placed in Russia

Turn Complete - Russians
            Russians collect 37 PUs; end with 37 PUs

triplea_40407_Rus1.tsvg

no scramble.

I’ll put a British sub with the destroyer and transport in sz 109 and a British fighter with the carrier in the med on sz98.

Looking forward to this.

Looking for a game of G40 if anyone is interested.

Thanks for the welcome and the game. What is the next step? If it is a bid, I will put a bit on the allies of 18. If it is something else, let me know.

In a game last week, my axis opponent prepared for sea lion with a massive transport and carrier build in the first two turns for Germany. On turn 3, the Italian and German fleet (with 9 loaded transports and 2 loaded carriers) combined next to Gibraltar so both could reach the US. As it was the US turn 3 and there was no declaration of war, I could still only build 3 units on each territory.

I had been splitting my US income between navy builds on the Pacific and Atlantic Coast (and preparing to liberate/support UK) and had two carriers on the Atlantic side. He was going for an Italian fleet hit on the US fleet to soften it in turn 3, to be followed by the German fleet which could then land 18 units in the US with air support. I had few land units because I was building naval and because I was moving troops to Hawaii.

This very nearly took me out. I had a destroyer on each coast. Because I could send 1 to 89 and 1 to 102 I could block the Italians while leaving enough of a fleet in 101 with a scramble to support it to prevent a German landing. He was forced to land in Canada but that gave me enough time to build just enough of a defense. Once his gamble failed, the game was mine, but it was a very near thing.

I don’t know if that is a reason for the sz 102 rule (along with the limitation on the movement of air units to UK) but it certainly saved me.

I’m new here but up for it (if you are willing to play inexperienced players). I can’t commit to playing until August 22/23 though.

@IKE:

@farmboy:

I didn’t think the of the fighters coming from UK (in my limited experience so far, they get used for scramble, defense of UK, and supporting the destroyer in taking out subs or the German battleship. So I’ve only simulated the combat with the UK bomber, the Egypt fleet and the Malta fighter. That obviously makes a difference and makes it much safer. I’d guess with 80% (1 UK fighter) to 95% 2 (UK fighter) odds, most Italy players aren’t going to try to scramble either. The British will lose the carrier and the two fighters after from a German counter but that will take some of the German air out of the game too.

thanks all for taking the time to walk me through this.

If the Germans make smart attacks turn 1 on the RN it doesn’t make sense to scramble.  Now if they get cute and try to do too much then a scramble may be worth it.

Yeah. I wouldn’t use them for a scramble in turn 1 (depending as you say, on the German attacks) but in turn 2.

I have only had a chance to play this a couple of times (and a couple of more times playing around in triplea), but so far I’ve used the fighters to hit surviving subs and/or the battleship near UK in turn 1 and (assuming no sea lion) I have tried to put 3 allied fighters in UK and 3 in Scotland (this means building 1 and moving the Gibraltar fighter up) so that I can rebuild a UK fleet in 109. I figured the German air force could still probably take it out but if they are going barbarossa it was worth it to pull the German airforce West and to take out half of it on turn 2.

I didn’t think the of the fighters coming from UK (in my limited experience so far, they get used for scramble, defense of UK, and supporting the destroyer in taking out subs or the German battleship. So I’ve only simulated the combat with the UK bomber, the Egypt fleet and the Malta fighter. That obviously makes a difference and makes it much safer. I’d guess with 80% (1 UK fighter) to 95% 2 (UK fighter) odds, most Italy players aren’t going to try to scramble either. The British will lose the carrier and the two fighters after from a German counter but that will take some of the German air out of the game too.

thanks all for taking the time to walk me through this.

thanks for the responses. I had a couple of follow up questions.

On Taranto, how much does the move by Germany to drop a fighter in for the scramble affect the attack. Without the fighter, it is pretty good odds (86% according to triple A’s calculator) but with it, it is 52%. it just seems to me that in the latter case, there is a lot to lose (that is hard for the UK to replace) for a 50% chance of seriously hurting Italy. Almost half the time, Italy can still do what you were trying to prevent and now you have lost your fleet (and possibly all your air units) to counter it later.

If one doesn’t do that, are their other options that people use? Is moving the fleet to Gibraltar (leaving a destroyer back as a blocker) an option? You mentioned this is worth it if you can get the 110 fleet to join. Can it be worth it without? The Germans could hit it (if the Italians gave them a place to land in Algeria) but hurting the German air force and pulling them out of Europe for a turn in round 2 might make that worth it. Maybe? Is Red Sea always a bad move? I take your point that Italy can grab Trans-Jordan and block them but that can be taken back.

On Dark Skies,

A bomber buy on turns 4-7 makes a lot more sense to me as that can support the tanks and mechs bought earlier on the push to Moscow and support counter attacks on US/UK landings. But the way I had read about it is that it was a strategy where bombers were the primary buy from round 1 (the posts I had read identified a flexibility to buy other units as needed but would aim for 2-4 bombers a turn). Am I off on that or does dark skies also include that approach as well? And if it does, what is the status of it as a strategy?

Thanks again on the responses.

the second question I was going to ask was about the first turn hit on the Italian fleet in sz 97. My understanding from the forum posts I’ve read, that this is a pretty common move but it is high risk (at least if the Germans drop a fighter there), and one that also kills the UK med fleet (and possibly some air power).

In my initial games as the allies, I avoided that and instead only went for sz 96, pulling the fleet behind the Suez and landing the fighters (now hitting 96 with one destroyer) back to Egypt. The Gibraltar fighter and cruiser could then support the UK in the Atlantic.

I get the value of keeping hitting that fleet and limiting the ability of the Italians to move units into North Africa. My thinking was that the UK med fleet is too valuable to lose early and that there would be attacks of opportunity without the scramble, once the Italians were committed to using it. I also thought there might be an advantage to encourage the Italians to move more units South (rather than East).  Anyway, I’m curious how others are thinking about this and whether there are good openers with the UK in the med that don’t involve hitting 97.

And sorry for combining different topics (or if these have been discussed to death elsewhere)

I’m fairly new to A&A Global (one in person game and 3 on triplea which I also just discovered), but have played lots of other A&A and strategy games. Because I’ve just gotten into it (and I’ve had some time) I’ve been obsessing with it (and these forums) and I had some random strategy questions thought this was a good place to post them.

First, I had read (here) about a strategy that some people use called Dark Skies where Germany prioritizes bomber builds and uses them essentially for strategic bombing, support for land unit stacks in Russia, and to prevent a UK fleet from being built and a US fleet from coming in with land units.  The effectiveness of this strategy was based on the exterior lines of the Allies  + the range of those bombers from the West German or France airbase. The power of this was not just that bombers are a powerful ranged unit that can do a lot of damage but that the threat of their attack would shape allied responses. The US can’t easily send troops because it must both sufficiently protect its transports and deal with Japan, so it would have to hold back. But those bombers would simultaneously threaten the UK and Russia and can Strat bomb to limit production and support land unit stacks to take territory.

There was debate here as to whether this was a game breaking strategy, a potentially good one for the Germans but not unbeatable, or suboptimal (most of the accounts I saw were the former but I saw all three). I looked for people’s counters to it but most of the solutions seemed to be rule changes. Most of this seem to have been posted a few years ago. I’m wondering what the status of this is now and if there is any more of a consensus on its effectiveness. I’m also wondering about the specifics of playing it? I understand you use it to support stacks against Russia, against American/British efforts to build a fleet in the Atlantic, and to bomb factories. But what are the key targets or goals with their use. What other builds go with it. What is the timing of the Axis DOWs that works best with it?

The reason I’m asking is I’m unconvinced (and using triplea I was playing around with it but not particularly effectively). My own thinking is that a significant number of bombers is going to be useful alongside other units, but a strategy that prioritizes them as the main build seems to be high risk (it can potentially fall apart if the allies get one significantly better than the average roll at the right time – this is an issue with any strategy in A&A but perhaps more so with this). I also thought there would be some effective ways to counter it simply by the allies (and primarily the Americans) making unequal exchanges and sacrificing units to force the Germans to use the bombers (reducing the bomber stack, putting the bombers out of position, and ensuring that for at least one turn, they can’t use them on anyone else). It seemed to me (again from playing around on tripleA) that the US could play this role using only half its income leaving enough to pressure Japan. The little bit I saw suggesting counters seemed to suggest something along these lines but I didn’t find much that was specific.

Obviously, I haven’t played against this strategy or enough A&A Global yet, so I realize I may just not be getting it. Thought people here with more experience of the game could fill that in.

Hi  Funcioneta,

thanks for designing this. It looks like it is going to solve the problem I was going to have tomorrow of having too many players. I was just curious if htere were any updates on this, any tweaks or a sense of how it effects game balance?