Posts made by Granada

@njnets25:

Another alternative to attacking Egypt is to put 6 units next to Egypt (2 from transport, plus 4 already in Africa) in RD1 and purchase a carrier.  For protection you can fly in Japanese fighters from the pacific carrier in RD1.    As long as you take out  British destroyer & cruiser in Germany RD1 you will be able to funnel troops to Africa.

I have seen used very similar strategy against me. The Germans sunk my med ships with the planes, purchased AC and a tran. Of course, I was not able to sink AC, BB and 2figs as Hobbes suggests but I was still a happy player because what Germany put on water equaled to 7inf and was doomed sooner or later anyway.

It was actually sooner as he made the mistake of spliting the two ships R2 and the AC was sunk by bomber and the 3figs (one landed in Moscow for that purpose R1). UK took Berlin R6. Otherwise I would move my three UK figs I bought R1 and the other one I got from the start to Moscow R2 to sink him R3 with airforce of a bmb and 7figs if he only dared to enter the SZ15 anymore. Yes UK can have this on R3 if Germany is not attacking AE and UK is not wasteful.

Meantime an allied fleet consisting of 2BB (one UK, as I take norway on russian R1 so that it cannot be destroyed), DD, 2AC, 4 figs, cru, sub could enter the SZ 12 R3 completing the trap. Germans will lose everything on the water R4 the latest.

Hobbes, you should show him our game from yesterday. Admittedly, i could have played better, and i got diced on R1 ukr attack, but i would not say it had an overall impact. Your axis looks much likely side to win at this point. In spite of me sending 8 US troops to Africa a round, 7-8 UK troops to Europe. Russia is just hanging, Germany controlls all the three western teritories with tons of inf and planes and has increadible army with 12 tanks and even more inf in caucasus – R6. Although all the stats are still even, axis looks much more likely side to win now. I would also say there is no bid necessary. I would definitely not ask for it if i play axis.

Thanks all for posting responses. After playing first serious A50 game yesterday I can see part of the appeal. But still i think the game is way too long for me.

Although I can see the argument that for the experienced players the AA50 is more attractive and for everyvody there are too little changes to revised. I think actually Spring 1942 is actually quite different game to revised because of the change of the transport rules you cannot use many startegies developed for the revised.

Anyway I still cannot understand why the community would not give the Spring1942 more support.

Hi!

I play only from time to time and usually on triple A. But always when i check at triple A, there is almost nobody playing Spring1942, the so called version 4. There are still more revised games than v4. And there are much more 1941 V3 games which really suprises me given the fact so many people complain how unbalanced the game is.

Any explanation?

Is it because people still like revised more? There are too little differences for people to bother with learning ?

Do people play rather V3 1941 because it is more complex?

Do people get already enthusiastic with 1940 games and if they want to play something simple they rather go for revised which has a long history of devoloping and testing different strategies?

Or has it something to do with the fact that the 1942 game is so bad in design that you cannot play it with out of the box map?

And look at this forum: there are more discussions on strategies and games in Revised, 1941 or Pacific 1940 forums than here.

So why is that? What are your opinions?

More precisely, as a rule I do on G1 5-6 attacks. Assuming standard Wrus and UKR R1, I send

1. SZ2 sub, bomb, fig
2. battleship SZ 15
3. fig, 2inf, 2tnk AE
4. 3fig SZ13
5. Counter UKR with whatever is appropriate
6. Taking Karelia either with whatever is appropriate

On non-combat I station the figs in France and I move all the ships to different zones.

I buy 6inf, 2 tnk and 1 bomb to be able to deter the allies from merging SZ 8 and to be able to continue trading ukraine and to continue pressure on Africa.

The strategy then is to get as far as possible in AFrica, trade Karelia and Ukr and keep allies honest which basically means make them to keep their navy united.

The problem with the opening is that it seems almost 50-50 that one of the critical battles will fail. Sometimes i do not sink the SZ 2 battleship, sometimes i lose two planes SZ13, sometimes the A-E fails and I have also once lost ma battleship SZ 15.

So are there any ideas for better openings?

Well, well, it is all very interesting and maybe someone who designed the rules can give the final answer, though I think Derek77 eloquent explanation is correct.

But I believe no one has answered the original question. What Japan is going to do if the US comes after her with floods of subs (and of course a limited number of other ships too). So far I have found that if the allies manage to push Japan back for about 3 rounds on the land, it can be really crippled very quickly. It happened to me, I did it once and I cannot see a proper counter strategy yet since the subs are so effecient attacking tool in Spring42.

WIth all the respect to the good strategic thought found here, I think you are not answering the original concern of the founder of the thread. Surely there are different strategies in terms of what needs or can be done in the sea. But my experience so far tells me there are three crucial strategic issues related to the sea. 1. How to delay Allies landing in Europe 2. Who controls Africa. 3. How to confront a swift demolishon of Japan with the tons of US subs.

I am not sure but my guess is the founder of the thread wanted to discuss the option 3 – he was referring to the subs. And subs are not a weapon to be used against Germany.

In my modest experience I think the difference in the dynamics compared to Revised make Japan suprisingly weak against the combined push of the three allies on the continent AND A FLOOD OF US SUBS threataning it from R4. Japan once you sink its fleet is doomed. And it looks it can be really done quickly and easily here with the US subs.

But dont you really do the SZ2? It goes well most of the time. If you do not do it, the Allied fleet is too strong already R1 and can land Africa already round 1. I cannot belive anybody would not take the risk of taking out the UK bb and trannie R1 for just a sub /which is going to die anyway/ and a fig.

And Do you do the Bom, fig attack on the UK SZ2 then? Because if you do, the trade is to get both planes killed and still run a approx. 1/3 risk of not sinking the battleship. And as a German player I would prefer to have a allied cruiser in SZ8 to having there a battleship (together with the loaded AC and 2dd the UK may buy R1).

I would definitely use the SZ 8 sub on sinking the SZ2 UK fleet.

My friend, you are taking to high a risk, I would say. I think you were just lucky no German player have not come for the Russian fig, which is there to take in AE. 2Inf, 2TNK, fig and bomb will take out your inf, tnk and 2figs. As a German player I would be even happy to trade my fig for the Russian one, it things go badly during the combat.

You will miss it when trading teritorries with Germans later on in the game. My sub will pick the lonely tranny at SZ1 and you are not landing anywhere UK R1 other then suicidal because you would have only two land units to do so. What you may count on though is that your India fleet in case I am not taking AE with any of my land units can assist in destroying the German med fleet on R1 thus effectively ending the contest in Africa more or less.

Is this chance worthy the higher risk you might not get Ukr R1 safely with support of only 1 fig and you will lose the other Russian fig in AE? I doubt it.

And you should never go with rus fig for the German trannie because you would stand a risk of not having a single russian plane after R1 which is simply not an option.

Sorry friend, I am here only occationally (vacations etc) and I am really not a frequent player. I do not have time to play-test in any other way then in TripleA. You can find me there from time to time as Granada but I cannot host now.

Regarding the Russian sub, you are correct. I have not inculded it because it survives only if you decide to submerge it during the R1 attack of German sub, fig and bomb on SZ2 before the fight. But it further diminishes the likelihood of the success in this particular battle. You cannot take the potential hit by the sub on it, which is good because it gives your battleship good chance to get at least one plane. If you keep the Russian sub in the fight the likelihood it would survive is about 60 %.

If you include the sub to the R2 battle calculations in the SZ8, you are correct that it changes the odds for the defender in case of 2subs plus four planes on the German side. In case attacker has built a bomber R1 and still has three figs to hit you, the odds for him to win remain 66% with 1,7 units left.

The fact is that the Germans must build a bomber R1 if they want keep the likelihood of Allies merging in SZ 8 with stronger fleet under 50%. R2 you really can prevent them to merge there and R3 you cannot perhaps prevent them to land some troops somewhere. You are perhaps right in that respect.

Still the question whether the Germans will not get their planes to the point when they will sink some of your fleets especially if you decide to split it will be omnipresent and the dynamics of the sea battles in the Atlantic have definitely changed in their favour.

Just quick response regarding the maths. Just checked that again at the TripleA battle calculator.

If Germany attacks with 2subs, 2figs, 2bmbs  your set up of 2dd, AC, 2figs and crs the odds are 50 % win,  8 % draw, 42 % lose, attacker units left 1,08.

If you add the one more fig, you would have in most cases, the odds are 78win-5draw-17defender, 2,24 units left.

We may discuss the other ideas like German Africa (there will be no americans in congo R3 if not for a dice luck), and leaving Japan unchecked (i have very little experience with pacific, since i am trying to master the art of killing russia or germany quickly enough) but concerning the Atlantic I really cannot see any way allies get to the SZ2 R2 but with great deal of luck.

UK will have to build what you suggest R2 at SZ2, reinforce it R3 and merge it at the SZ 8 R3 with reinforced US fleet. Only R4 UK now most likely at less then 20 can start building transport, R5 ship the units somewhere, R6 build a real presence at the continent, R7 Japan has 18 tanks, floods of infantry and 6-7 planes attacking Moscow.

I just wonder if you know the Caspian Sub Policy Paper dealing with the issue of Indian factory. I have always thought it basically demolishes the idea of factory build UK1 and certainly I cannot see how your strategy would counter the CSub people counter to make it Japanese ownership by round 3. Or have they made any mistake in their calculations?

@Fleetwood:

I’m not certain on game balance having only played two decent length games. Germany is weaker in Africa, Allies are weaker in the Atlantic. Germany is also weaker in Europe because they’ll lose a lot more fighters as compared to Revised. Russia attacks Ukraine r1. Germany’s down to 5 fighters. Germany loses a sub and fighter against the British Battleship. Over half the time, Germany loses a fighter against the cruiser. Maybe the dice take a dump on Germany and they have to lose a fighter to close the Suez Canal. It would be typical to see Germany down to just 3 fighters and a bomber by the end of their turn.

Losing the Battleship is probably a lesser evil than Russia having to take Norway and potentially sacrificing a fighter. My PBEM opponent has been experimenting with German bomber buys and he concluded that Germany needed to buy 2 bombers and lose only one fighter in their G1 attacks to prevent the Allies from merging in z8. Yes, this is accounting for the escaping Baltic subs. Unless the Germans build bombers, the Allies can take z8. If the Germans do build bombers, then the British retreat their Canadian transport to US waters, save their money and build fleet next turn and Germany is short on infantry against the Soviets.

Well, I cannot tell, neither, having played also only two games. And I am still quite new so you must be much more experienced player. But in most games I have played or tested in Triple A, Germany was not under four figs and a bomber R1. As you say “Maybe the dice take a dump on Germany”, but Maybe it will not. So typically, when G is doing Ukraine, British BB, AE, and the SZ 13 cruiser, one of the battles goes really bad. You are less then 50 % losing a fig against the BB (precisely 4/9th, unless the russian sub hits), you have definitely less then 25 % losing the fig at AE, you have less then 10 % losing the one at ukr (only a fanatic would push the attack if it does not look well after the first round of rolls), and you have just 50 % losing the one against cr in SZ 13. This I think gives you definitey more then 50 % germany is with 4 figs after R1, but i have not done the precise maths.

I cannot see Germany weaker in Africa either. Is it the russian black sea sub R1 or the Bomber and fighter UK R1 gamble on the batlleship that makes them weaker or what? Let us not forget that both moves are not without a price in that they leave Japan virtually uncontested from R1 which may prove lethal R7 in Moscow.

Now, if I would buy one Bmb, 3arm, 4tnk R1, and atack the SZ 8 with 3figs, 2 bmbs and 2 subs R2 if the allies really dare to set up there, I would be very happy Germany player indeed. Against AC, dd, cr and 2 figs (assuming UK has not lost one sinking my dd) i would have 2 subs, 3 figs and a bmb and it gives me 94 % win, with 3,26 units left (if i have only 2figs and 2 bmbs as you suggest, it gives me 76 % a 2 units alive). In case you have build AC and 2DD UK R1, the math is 78%, 2,25 units with 3fig/ 50% 1,05 units left with 2figs.

Since I would keep building a bomb or a fig a round, the danger would be omnipresent, while allies have lost 100+ IPCs worth of units on the sea and i would be in a position of sinking them once again while japan would be expanding fast, germany would be gaining in africa and keeping balance in the east front with ease.

With Allies not being able to set their foot on European soil before R4-5 and threaten Germany itself effectively before R8-9, with Germany being able to sacrifice their planes for the more dangerous of the convoys for at least one more time and with Japan taking on Moscow R7 with about 18 tanks lots of planes and enough infantry to have a good skew, i cannot really see succesful KGF without extremely lucky dice rolls.

It seems to me that not giving the trannies any minimal defensive power (like 3 or less from two dice rolls) was really a mistake that makes it almost impossible for the allies to set up the convoys in time against a skillful axis player.

Well, I have just played 2games of AA42. One with my sons yesterday on the deluxe map i downloaded here (the tiny map is just not working, it is like playing chess on an euro coin) and one just now on Triple A. The first one i have won for allies after epic battles and 14 hours of play with Japs taking moscow the same round brits took berlin. Then combined US/UK troops pushed the mighty japs back.

Today I have played in a tripleA one game for axis and won against a decent opponent in 3R with Germany controlling all of the original terriotires, kar, arch, AE, and four other afr. teritories, TJ and stacked in bel.

Jap was in ind, pers, austr, bur, sink.

I had 92 IPCs production and my opponent resigned just before his american third move. He could have played some more but it did not look nice for him.

It is true that in the first game I had some outragousely very bad dice rolls, while in the second game i had some favourable ones (but nothing outrageous). Still it seems to me that compared to the revised the rule changes substantially and quite oviously favour AXIS, at least in a classic KGF game.

If ruskies don’t do Nor (and to be sure of taking it, they must sacrifice there one of their so precious figs), Germany can take all UK boats but the SZ1 tran out of Atlantic R1 and with a sub move to SZ7 even prevent UK from putting anything on sea R1. Isn’t that crazy?

The Nor move would also mean Rus not doing Ukr R1 with a harsh pressure developed on cau from the very R1.

the trannies not having any defensive power give axis too much advantage i think. Because japs need them mostly only in their very own sea while the allies really need to do some difficult shuffles to be effective in Atlantic. It seems to me that for the game to be fair the trannies should have some minimal inherent defence like rolling two dice with both combined having to roll on less then three for a hit.

I do not see how the allied startegy outlined above is dealing with the substantial shift of the balance of the sea battles in favour of axis and i tend to agree with the comments posted by funcioneta. In a typical sea battle in revised the D-count and D-punch was 3-4 higher (trannies) then it is now, which can be on its own equal to the bid of 10 or more.

The one thing i am inclined not to agree with funcioneta yet though is that a KJF strategy is an obvious dead end. Actually, it might be true that the changes playing against the allies in the Atlantic might play for them in a carefully executed Contain Jap first strategy that would possibly include an Australian IC with the goal of getting the US to set up at one of the big 4 point islands as soon as possible.

I am from the Czech Republic a I have very little time. I play online from time to time but I am definitely not even an average player (I play chess much better.). But reading the CS policy papers I have downloaded recently might have been the greatest joy I have had with the game so far. I just wanted to ask whether the twenty papers is all that is left after the group? I could not find anything on Russia for instance…

this is what happened to me yestarday… I was able tu pull out quite nice KGF. I got with England to WE and to hold it by R7. I even got to hold with the US SE by R8. BUt it was still not enough as the yellow hords were able to confront me succesfully in Africa, have got over 60 Ipcs by R7 and rolled over Russia. And with 14, yes 14, tanks in Caucasus would be able to help Germany R10 before my English suicidal attack R9 there ended my hopes anyway… If i would put resourcešs into fighting japs over Africa it would divert them from getting Italy asap.

I did not ignore Japan entirely. I picked all the lonely transports in PAcific with UK fighter stationed in Caucaus, I even killed both jap battleships, one in Mediterreanen that has come to help jerrys, the other one coming with one transport to land in Brasil. In R5/6 I was even able to put a US tran and AC with two fighters to Pacific. I landed in Solomon and then in Borneo but still it seems to me it was all too slow…

Simply Russia does not seem to me to be able to sustain the japanese onslought long enough for the allies to kill the Germany. If you help russia or if you confront Japs in Pacific harder or if you go heavy to africa, it all seems to divert resources from effective push on Germany which makes things only worse.

In previous games when i tried to do something like Contain Japan first, on the other hand Germany had grown unstoppable. Any thoughts, anybody?

Well i tried, it worked for a while but now it seems the only “reward” i got is that since today i cannot connect with the explanation that reads “Could Not Connect to Lobby : Connection Refused : No further information”. Any idea what that means?

I have another but really substantial problem with TripleA. It does not want to log me in under my name claiming i have a wrong password which is a nonsens. When I try to find any address of an admin or support it appears to me there is none. Can anybody please help?

oh well, i have just tried the strategy against an experienced player and i was destroyed terribly. SZ 12 IS NOT A SAFE PLACE R1. You would not have 2 UK trans in most cases. I played against bid 9 so there was one sub more from the start and an AC on G1. Any kind of convoying system is necessary for US but next time i am going to make sure that i control the atlantic solidly first. I made some childish mistakes too, but if the germans put an effort to contesting the atlantic you cannot just build trannies. You have to sink their ships first and you have to do it quick and as cheap as possible.

Btw if the convoying system is to work smoothly you need for US actually three sets of transport ships, two wount do.