Posts made by hyogoetophile

@Bunnies:

Yeah, generally you try to play Axis and Allies while you’re watching a movie or painting miniatures or something with your buddies.  That’s how it goes.

My slow-ass, original A&A turns actually got my friends playing Turok for the N64. Which led to Halo parties, and who knows what else. Lots of things can spawn during the in-between of A&A turns.

@Krieghund:

Either way, those Canadian troops aren’t going anywhere by sea this turn.

Those Canadian troops (or troop if it’s just that arm) can still make it out. Just pick them/it up in sz9 instead.

@Crazy:

:roll:
A prebid fighter in Finland/Norway to go after that BB Tran and Rus sub though, now that has merit! 2 fighters, a bomber and the atlantic sub, and there should be no UK navy anywhere around Europe, really peaks my interrest. :-o
But nobody is crazy enough to give me 10 bid. :evil:

You can do almost that exact attack with an 8IPC bid. Just place another sub in the Atlantic. Yeah, Russia can maybe take Nor, but the odds aren’t that hot, and who has the troops to hit Nor, WRu and Ukr on R1? Something’s gotta give…

Bunnies, I think the phrase you were grasping for was “the elephant in the room.”

@Funcioneta:

But this is the magic of the ICs: if things go bad, you can still deploy the IC in South Africa or Australia. Any of them is good (maybe Australia more tricky, but also more powerful than S. Africa)

I’ve never actually tried an Aus IC, but I don’t think it’s a good option. Probably even worse than biting the 15 IPC bullet and just dropping an IC in Ind.

SAf has been appealing for a while and I’ve seen it work ok, but never tried it myself. I think it’s about half as bad as a UK1 Ind complex. Yeah, it can help the UK contest Africa, but it costs 15. Right there it better save the UK 7.5 1IPC territories or it’s not even paying for itself. Then you gotta factor in the 6-8 (maybe more?) IPCs it sucks up every turn. Meanwhile, the TTs (triple IPC territories, if I’m getting the name right) are up in Europe. It’s usually not gonna be worth fighting over Africa.

Oh, and a UK1 IC is hardly ever a good idea either. I maybe saw one game where an Ind and Sin ICs working in tandem with loads of Allied air were kicking butt. I need to find that game and study its genius.

@AxisOfEvil:

One variation on u-505 opening that i like to use. I dont think its been mentioned yet: dd to take out the tran. Sub to take out jap sub in sz45. tran from australia to take New gunea. Tran from india to take Borneo. AC to block retake of borneo by placing in sz 49. Your are only 2 to 1 favorite to take borneo with 2 inf vs 1, but when u do, it sure slows japan down. And with this open, they have so many targets, there no way they can pearl.

The Borneo landing is basically as good as falling back to Kenya. You often put the ac in the way to prevent a J1 retake, but then you might get 4IPCs, and deny Japan the same! I prefer Kenya, but it’s close.

But I don’t like the New Guinea attack. You take 2inf from the defense of Aus. You lose the transport. Japan will take that thing back by J3 at the latest. (+2, -2.) That’s it. Or you could (maybe even all of these in order): run east and then come back with your 2inf and put them back in Aus, thereby delaying Japan who was only read for 2inf in Aus (+2, -2); land the inf in Africa (+3/6); sail the trn up to UK just in time for transport overload (+8). So up to +13 for you, and up to -2 for Japan, just as a rough breakdown.

Having to retake New Guinea is a headache, but at that point you’re giving Japan too much incentive. As Japan I’d normally ignore NZ, even if it was undefended. With NG to also take, Japan might as well throw a party and take NZ, too. Yet another mark against UK landing in NG.

Oddly enough, this question is very relevant. I was talking with my dad about, you know, oil, and he mentioned a geographic formation called the Canadian Shield. I just Wiki’d it, and it’s for real. A big plateau (or shield I guess is the term) in central and eastern Canada.

So: Is this where the strategy got it’s name from? I always assumed that Canada came from the basing in WCan and ECan (obviously) and the Shield part was just some cool noun. Plus, it’s kinda like a big shield coming down from Canada and smushing WUS or EUS. That’s the most sense of I could make of it, so I’m wondering if this geographic formation is the true inspiration.

Anybody know? Any subbers wanna chime in?

It’s ok Bunny – at least you and I get the reference. And if Ivan does, he’s not showing it.

@Bunnies:

So maybe there is something to this “Advanced Flight” of yours.  Of course, I will have to research Combustion and Engineering first.  I suppose I will take Romans for their Bronze Working.  :roll:

Ha!

Same here. I asked the three, I dunno, lobby room admins? if they knew which port I should forward through, but got no response. But apparently it’s not a port-forwarding issue. Something with Java and Firefox and heck if I know how do that. Port 3300 and my IP gets TripleA to play nice, but that’s the only trick I’ve got.

I wanna log in and see how lamo this new server is! TripleA forever!

Unfortunately, so much depends on what Germany is doing. I’m loathe to land units in a territory (WEu, Nor, Kar, Arc) where a German stack is just going to obliterate them for the cost of a few inf, but sometimes this is your only option.

I’ve sort of found that landing in Arc leads to a longer game, where the Allies are more sort of reinforcing the Russians as opposed to actually striking out on their own against Germany. This can even be the case for Kar sometimes, too. So it’s really more of a question among WEu (uber aggressive), Nor (usually safe), and Kar/Arc (conservative/safe).

If Germany is putting serious pressure to deadzone certain territories, then I’d certainly go for the other one(s). Anywhere where the western Allies can start building up a stack is a good place. You don’t want to keep throwing 4inf 4arm into German stacks.

But, if you can choose, I’d say Kar is the place (or, bv extension, just marching through Nor into Kar). It allows for reinforcement into Russian territories and a march through Germany’s lines.

WEu can be quite a sucker punch. Once the UK holds it, they can maybe drop an IC to make use of their extra income, and once the US takes Seu, Germany is like 1-2 turns from dead. Not that I know this from experience, but just looking at the numbers Germany must have a ridiculously huge stack on Ger/EEu or Weu/Seu/Lon/EUS will overrun it very quickly.

It really depends on the G player whether WEu can be taken. Even among the most aggressive (who abandon WEu early), it can still be hard to make a strong landing that leads to UK holding WEu and US taking SEu. Against more so “turtle” players your best bet is to avoid the heavily defended WEu and just go Nor/Kar.

However, a key thing is to look at the board. If Russia is really straining to survive, maybe some reinforcements will get it out of a tough spot and ensure that Mos or even Cau doesn’t fall. But if the Allies have a sizeable lead, it’s only going to get larger: Make calculated moves through Nor/Kar/EEu and just slog your way into Ger.

Really, G shouldn’t be able to defend both Kar and WEu for more than a few turns, so once the pressure is off, you look at the board, choose north or throat, and go go go.

I completely agree with overbuilding the UK on transports (usually the Aus trn becomes the fifth), and with that and an efficient US, you should be making G sweat bullets.

Bunnies’ post was rather tactless, but I guess mostly right. In switch’s defense (ha!) this isn’t a topic that gets much play in the forums. Opinions don’t come quite as readily.

In my mind, there are two defense tactics in A&A: deadzoning and defzoning (I just made it up). Deadzoning keeps a territory mostly or completely empty with the threat that whatever goes there will be strafed or killed. Defzoning is just flat out stacking units into a territory. Deadzoning is best achieved through offensive power, whereas defzoning relies on defensive power. Deadzoning can defend quite a few territories, while defzoning holds one. A key to defense is knowing when to blur the two or switch between them. This isn’t terribly hard. People usually follow the old rules of infantry picketing and deadzoning, and after adding up some numbers either you can move forward or you just stay put – or it’s time to move back and leave some 1infs lying around.

The tricky part is being able to anticipate such changes through your builds. If you buy infantry now, but a few turns later you’re trying to deadzone more territories but are short on tanks, then that’s gonna hamper your ability to take ground. You want to anticipate deadzone or defzone moves and have the right units around at the right times.

Unfortunately, I’m still pretty poor at this. Maybe if I’m Russia and Germany just smashed me pretty hard (not necessarily a good attack for them, maybe just a unit-killer for both sides) I’m gonna buy a lot of infantry. But whether I build all inf or inf and some art/arm is a decision that I just sort of feel my way through. There are some general unit-buying approaches (inf for Russia, inf/arm for Germany), but even among those there are plenty of diversions. I keep seeing talk about three large infantry stacks and one tank stack defending WEu/Ger/EEu, and while that sounds like a good idea if Germany is turtling, I can’t recall ever being in that situation. I think it’s because I’m a very aggressive/offensive-minded player, but my point is that there are a lot of “standard” approaches out there.

Knowing about which round certain standard things tend to happen (UK/US land in WEu or move into EEu, Ger moves on Cau, Jpn takes Novo) can be a big help, but being able to carefully react to the board position during purchasing is really where defenses shine. Anyone have more practical guidelines for defensive purchasing?

Also, on the off chance that you haven’t heard of TripleA, it’s a free program that runs all kinds of games, including Revised, and it has a server where people play all the time. Hop on there and you can watch people play just about any time of any day.

@uffishbongo:

–-Third, I noticed that they really like to stack Karelia early, i.e. on G1 if I let them.  This makes life with the British rather frustrating as you may have plenty of transports and plenty of ground troops, yet nowhere to land without getting massacred.  I’ve switched to a 3 inf/3 tank R1 buy for the sole reason that it helps avoid a G1 Karelia stack.

I’ve encountered the same thing. I know Karelia is important, but I’ve always been able to kick Germany out on R2/3. I didn’t realize that doing so absolutely hinged on R1 3inf/3arm builds. I just liked the build.

In one game – where a G2 attack on WRus ruined me – Germany bid I think it was 1arm Lib and 1inf Belo and kept only the transport in the Baltic. This meant instead of 8inf 4arm there was 11inf 4arm in Kar, and I didn’t realize how significant those 3inf can be. I built I think it was 4inf 3arm and, after looking at the Kar stack, stubbornly sat – and died – in WRus. Afterwards I was looking at the numbers for strafing that stack on R2 and I remember them being pretty scary. Unfortunately, Russia almost has to do the strafe and trade inf for inf I think it was, because otherwise they almost have to retreat from WRus, and then it takes a much longer time to unseat Germany from Kar.

I was thinking the Germany infantry rule is a pretty solid one, but I’ve definitely seen games where Germany went very tank heavy and still whomped on me. Granted, it was probably because of Caucasus falling early or me being too stubborn to vacate WRus/Kar for a turn, but yeah, board position is king.

Even if we just throw that all out the window and say that for beginners – or as a very general guideline – that such-and-such rules are a good idea, I still don’t think G1 Baltic ac should necessarily be included. I was always a very strong proponent of the Baltic ac, but UnBaltic seems to do other wondrous things. As long as you’re doing one or the other (and not just, say, leaving the fleet to die).

One basic that wasn’t mentioned: Africa. It’s kinda vital. While others go ga-ga over the 1inf in Belo/Ukr/WRus bid or some inf against Russia and some unit in Africa, a bid of 1inf Lib and 1arm Alg combined with the transport and battleship coming over almost assuredly means Germany will have at least 3arm in AE come G2, even if you factor in a 1bmb 1ftr 3inf counterattack (I play Low Luck, calc LL, and think LL – but the numbers can’t be that far off for regular dice).

Or if you don’t go full boar into Africa, see if you can’t deter the round 1 Allied landing in Alg (UnBaltic does this rather beautifully). Or land lots of troops in Africa, blitz a few tanks south, and contest Alg/Lib if there isn’t a huge UK/US stack on them.

Don’t spend too much on Africa, especially if you are buying a Baltic ac or fighters, but you’d be amazed what a little German ingenuity along with the Luftwaffe in range of sz12 can do. Every turn that Africa is mostly grey and the Allies are in Alg/Lib/nowhere is a turn Germany is up 10 or so and UK is down the same.

I’m confused, does Dive Bombers give German fighters a pre-combat attack where they hit on 5s, or is it they hit on 5s during the first round of combat? It looks like the latter, but then I don’t know why everyone likes them so much. Panzerblitz is so much better: You can just use your tank stack to trade territory while fighters could pick up targets of opportunity and hold WEu.

@Crazy:

Actually, I did suffer a sealion invasion once. Germany lost all its’ planes and an Inf, leaving it’s tank.
the two UK BBs sank the invasion fleet, and with the Russian sub, blocked any further attempt to retake on G2.
USA liberated London.
Germany lost more IPCs than they gained; Baltic fleet, 5 fighters, bomber, tank and inf.
I won the game, somewhere around round 8 as I recall.
Germany just could not counter very well with no Luftwaffe. And Germanys turn one buys were so small for land units that Russia was able to go on the offensive by R3. :-D

Obviously a bit of a hiccup, because Germany can just land one west of the Baltic and block the UK bb/trn with a sub.

How many dice did Germany spend to get LRA?

@tekkyy:

Lol. Switch, Ranor and myself has repeated yet again. So people, stop it with that 40 IPC on tech thing.
Be reasonable, Germany is not commited. See what Russia does first.
What wrong with 1 die?

1-3 die is much more dangerous than an all-out Sea Lion, because if Germany gets LRA, it can build G1 transports that can be used to retake UK on G2. Cha-ching! That would get Germany the 30 more IPCs it needs to drop the 10inf that will kill Russia. Or it could just build 8-11inf then and there.

@ncscswitch:

The difference Hyog is that in an unBaltic strat, Germany does not have an extra $38 to spend on G2, and UK is not only delayed, but is incapable of building at all.

In this version, it is not “10 INF and whatever ARM it can muster”  It would be more like 10 INF and 20+ ARM.  Big difference between 20+ ARM compared to cobbling together the remnants of Germany’s starting ARM (6-8 ARM).

Sea Lion:
G1 - 40 IPCs spent on LRA, everything goes well
G2 - 76-80 IPCs to buy 15-16 arm

UnBaltic:
G1 - 15-24 IPCs spent on air/sea, 16-25 IPCs spent for 3-5arm
G2 - 40 IPCs spent for 8arm

Sea Lion: ~10inf ~22arm by G3
UnBaltic: ~10inf ~19arm by G3

This is even assuming a G1 air/sea build. Otherwise it’s like exactly the same amount of money to spend on arm. The only difference is that one build is G1/G2 and the other is just G2.

After a successful Sea Lion, UK won’t be landing for a while, but it’s not much worse than when the UK fleet gets wiped out by UnBaltic. And during those turns when 10inf 20+arm are dashing to Cau/Mos, Germany is going to be really hurting to trade territories. My point is, Sea Lion doesn’t field that much more arm. In fact, UnBaltic leaves Germany with a few more fighters and Sea Lion provides a few more arm. They both provide pretty much exactly the same amount of offensive power.

@ncscswitch:

Jen,

How do you think Germany is “out of INF” on G2?

You do a modified retreat of surviving units, stack out of range of the Russians, and on G3 you unload against them with about 20 divisions, most of it ARM.

With ANY Japan pressure at all… TOAST!

With a Sea Lion, the UK’s heavy landings are delayed by 1-3 turns, but an UnBaltic counterattack in sz7 also delays the UK by about the same amount. And in UnBaltic games, Germany can’t just send less than 10inf and whatever arm it can muster at Russia. That stack won’t make it.

It does look like Sea Lion sabotages the UK a bit more than other strategies, but it also means basically no German airforce. That’s a few or several 3s that Russia won’t have to defend against.

I still don’t see how a Sea Lion gives Germany that much of an edge.

I’ve never actually seen an LRA G1 Sea Lion, but I thought it involved retaking UK and more or less sewing up the game. It was only a 50/50 shot of winning the game right there because you had to multiply the UK attack by the odds of getting LRA with 8 dice. But if the strategy has been outlined correctly in the previous posts, then I definitely am not as afraid of it as I used to be.

Very often the G sub will kill the sz1 trn and UK won’t be putting units on the board until the end of UK3. That in itself is rather huge, but it has to stack up against a lot.

Germany loses basically all of its airforce, right? New ftrs could be purchased, but I don’t think Germany could afford to build too many. So trading territories would become much more costly for Germany. 80+ ipcs for G2 is scary, but, no, Moscow would not fall on G4. I’m guessing that would mean 20 some arm (and maybe more from a G3 build) just come storming across Europe. First, they would go to Kar/Belo/Ukr and then Arc/WRus/Cau and then Mos. That’s G5 at the earliest. Second, those armor wouldn’t make it. I mean, maybe I’m wrong, but I think Russia would build enough units during those turns to be able to either kill the arm or keep them at bay. Meanwhile, Germany would be having a jolly old time trading territories on the eastern front.

I mean, look at it. Germany’s G2 build of 80 IPCs is almost exactly what Germany’s normal G1 and G2 builds would add up to. Build 8arm on G1, G2 and G3 and see how often that works for you.

I’m pretty sure the G1 UK attack requires all of Germany’s airforce, so most of the time the AE attack would be 2inf 2arm vs 1inf 1arm 2ftr. Not too hot for Germany. Without running any numbers, it looks like whatever survives AE would be wiped out by 3inf 1ftr on the following round. Some more UK inf eventually find their way to Africa, and the two US trns could swing down and drop 2inf 1art 1arm into FEq. Germany would not be making much in Africa at all. Some money, yeah, but you’re not gonna see a gray continent.

@TimTheEnchanter:

@newpaintbrush:

@TimTheEnchanter:

So NPB, in OOB/FAQ rules, if there is a sea zone battle, and the defender takes all but subs as losses, can the attacker retreat, or can the defender submerge the subs and trap the attacker in that sea zone?  I couldn’t find a clear answer to that.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/faqs/axisrevised

Retreats (section)

Can I retreat if I’ve eliminated all the defending units or if all defending units have submerged?
No. You can only retreat if enemy units remain on the battle board.

I believe that indicates that the defender can choose to submerge subs first, leaving the attacker stuck.

That is still vague to me, because the subs may have submerged on a prior combat round. :shrug:

I thought there was a line in some ruleset about how you can’t retreat if all that is left is submerged subs. This would indicate that the submerge step is before the retreat step. But anyway, this thread has really strayed. CSub says subs first, LHTR says attacker first, OOB is crap.

Can’t we get back to the UnBaltic discussion?

Two questions:

TripleA has an edit function? Is there a newer version that 0.9.0.2?

How come CSub rules say subs submerge before the attacker can retreat, when – as has been said – LHTR rules say attacker first?

Even under LHTR, I still think UnBaltic, fleet unification, whatever you want to call it is still one of Germany’s best openings. For one, if the UK does retreat to sz8, then the US strafe of sz7 will only have a bmb. The EUS ftr can only hit sz7 if there’s a UK ac there.

A bid of 1sub in sz8 can wipe out both UK bbs – though likely at the cost of a ftr – and sorta prevents a US1 landing in Alg, but Germany doesn’t make it very far in Africa. A Baltic ac forces a smart UK player to build ftrs and can still go north or sit in the Baltic, but it doesn’t slow down Africa landings.

Another result of UK retreating to sz7 could be that G1 doesn’t involve an air purchase. If UK’s not gonna bring the fight, then this could free up money for a G1 Med ac (and trn?) purchase to meet up in sz13 on G2, or other G2 air/sea purchases.