Best posts made by JDOW

Gratz to Adam and thanks Juan for the nice wishes.
A very interesting game and again, Juan has prepared something on the whiteboard. Always good for a surprise.

2 things surprised me in general.

1. The biggest surprise was Japan giving up China. Especially with so many ground units bought early. I thought, Japan could have done both, taking Eastern Russian territories AND take China and later India. I think Japan keeping up the threat to win the game would have provided more relief to Germany as USA would not have been able to go so hard after Germany then without unleashing Japan to become a monster.

2. Now, as you had the big Japanese army marching west, I was totally surprised to see it move to Vologda in turn 11. I thought your plan was from the beginning to sent these troops to take Egypt. You could have penetrated the middle east two turns earlier in case this army heads to Kaz in turn 11. This would have brought extra money to Germany, too.
   I believe the game would still be going in this case.

@weddingsinger said in Why is Taranto raid so popular?:

@JDOW

I’m inclined to say I disagree with you about the UK ships being more precious.

The UK’s ships are incredibly useful BUT not necessarily required for creating opportunities. Italy’s ships are desperately needed in order for them to expand. Thus, if you’re able to trade the UK’s fleet for Italy’s the net result is a push for UK and Italy, but Italy only makes 10-15 ipcs and stays there. The UK can continue to expand into the middle east or piggy back the U.S. fleet in the Atlantic.

Taranto leaves Italy 1 transport and few warships vs the 92stack leaves Italy 2 transports and most of its fleet.

I think what you describe is one of the key reasons, why many people struggle with the Allies: Too much focus on the med and middle East and not showing enough dedication to establish a strong position in 110, EARLY!
And as said, Taranto is an ok option but it should certainly not be made at 70% odds, risking to lost and to allow Italy to absorb a hit for free with the BB that repairs automatically.

However, IF someone wants to show dedication to remove any Italian influence in the med, there are more efficient ways to blow the Italian fleet away entirely. Italy can’t do anything in case UK is focusing on crushing the Italian fleet.
Axis might try to prevent this but it would require German support with eg airbases or fighter to equip Italian carriers. Things Germans usually don’t want to do as it distracts from the real and only enemy in the first 6 turns, which is Russia.

However, focusing on the med too much always comes with the price to relieve Germans from pressure on Normandy and Norway which is very good for them.

One key in successful Allied strategy is to establish a position in 110 BEFORE the Germans manage to push the Russians off Bryansk. This is the squeeze, Germans must face: Either pushing Russians back and sending the planes in range of Bry or risk the Allies to establish a beachhead in Normandy or Norway.

So in the end, Taranto or not, Allies need fleet AND Air, AND transports in order to establish a position in 110. If they lose too many ships and planes due to Taranto, the mission is harder.

Additionally: The 92 move requires some experience in the balancing act to not lose Egypt early. Losing Egypt carelessly is a nail in the coffin for the Allies.
So there is certainly a downside and UK needs to be aware of a couple of details. I would go too far to explore them all but there are plenty of nuances in G1, and J1 and UK1 that affect how good or less good Taranto or stacking 92 is.

Adam chose sub 98, inf NG and inf Shan with his bid.

Let‘s have a great game!

G1 coming soon.

Why btw don’t we have a cool name for the “stacking 92 with airbase Gib” UK1 as we have for the attack in 97? :-)

Any suggestions?

fact is: Many players don’t scramble when they should and let Germans get away with greedy openers. And yes, the scramble gains significant value in case the Bismarck goes to 111 instead of 110.

You are right about an attack vs a defensive move. but “bastion” is great

So we are coming close. I would now prefer “Gib(raltar) Bastion”

Welcome Yelrae. Welcome to the league. Good luck with your first game!

@Aaron_the_Warmonger: Oysteilo got you my answer, I second his post above!

p.s.: I love “Gerrys”. :joy:

Wow, this looks like an incoming massacre. Did the US admirals lose their minds when boldly presenting the plan to stack the Guam seazone? :-)

Well, USA has to suffer convoy damage in that case but it seems the German sub commander was too busy watching beach girls:D

Cool, I am glad to hear that!

@Panther said in JDOW vs JWW/666 Allies+6 Game 2:

@JDOW Yes, they stay on the transport as the land combat part of the amphibious assault sequence can only take place if “the sea zone has been cleared of all defending enemy units …”.

Great, all clear now, thanks for the clarification. I only new how to handle if the assault comes from transports of the own power. In case the TT moved into the seazone for the assault it had to retreat. it is only logic that TTs that started in that sz, have to stay.

Thanks!

2 face2face. About 60-70 online.

I am convinced if the opposite. Allies need bid.
You can switch sides and find out why.

Warning, destructive feedback incoming.

But frankly, this is entirely useless. It lists some “strategies” that either don’t work at all or heavily depend on the context of what the Axis do.
This does not tackle the basic strategic considerations for the Allies AT ALL and is rather harmful than useful for players.

When I find some time I will write down some things that I would call “elements of an Allied playbook”.

200 sounds a bit over the top to me. I would be confident to beat any1 playing Allies with a 200 bid with low luck.

You are referring to documentation about the real Allied strategy in WW2?
I would say that the island-hopping strategy by the US in WW2 does only partly apply to AAA. I would not even bother to develop a strategy in AAA based on that.

@axis-dominion said in BM3 trulpen (X+3) vs axis-dominion (A) #1:

@trulpen said in BM3 trulpen (X+3) vs axis-dominion (A) #1:

@axis-dominion said in BM3 trulpen (X+3) vs axis-dominion (A) #1:

10x the bid, as in 30 bid for axis? Wow that’s a bit crazy much lol, I barely beat you, I mean you made some mistakes that hurt you but I can tell you’re pretty good at this game.

I think contrary that it’s pretty obvious that you’ve totally owned me. 3 IPC for Axis with me against you was a trap! ;)

Like Karl7 told in the forum about you being rusty, for the enlightment of any unwary opponent (that being me):

“Words any challenger to the mighty AD will live to regret…”

no really, you’re actually pretty good, but you can’t be playing your turns too hastily, especially when things get complex with lots of allied air surrounding Europe. and there are certain traps that you should be looking out for, that I can share with you after the game is over.

keep in mind also, that my giving you even a 3 bid goes against the accepted opinion of the masters, that the allies in fact need a bid, not the axis, and that amount so far is centered around 8 or 9. so in reality, it’s like I gave you a 12 bid!

AD is right about Axis still having the advantage in BM and about Allies in the need for a bid!

Hey there,

A G5 blitz to Moscow is indeed a threat and a viable strategy by the Germans. I assume the Germans attack Russia in G1? Or do they wait till G2?

In the end there are the following considerations to make:
1. How painful will the Moscow attack be? Example: If Germans win with 1 Tank and 2 bomber remaining they are most likely doomed to lose the game.
2. How efficient do you retreat? this is what cleric meant: How many Russian inf did you lose prior to the G5 Moscow attack?
3. What do the Allies do in the meantime? Germans buying no fleet should struggle early to UK and US landings in Western Europe. Here it is often a mistake to panic and send every UK fighter over to Moscow. The more fighters you send over the less pressure you can make in Normandy, Norway, Holland

4. Did you ever consider to block the Germans from stacking Bryansk G4? In case your opponent builds loads of tanks he does not have shitloads of land units in Bryansk G4. The question is: In case you prevent the Italians from taking Bryansk by sacrificing some Inf there, can you even attack the Germans in Bryansk in R4 in case they cannot land air there?

I can tell you one thing for sure: The G5 Moscow Blitz IS a viable strategy which can be successful if dice are decent for the Axis.
But it is also for sure a risky strategy. I can tell you for sure it is NOT an autowin and the Axis won’t have a 95%+ attack for sure.
And the question whether the Germans have 30%,50%,70% or 90% on Bryansk depends on what happens in the meantime. How lucky does German get G1? Do Germans lose some air for clearing the Med? How is the German air distracted  by invasions in the West? Tip here: In case the Germans offer you to take France, don’t refuse by definition. Retaking France and killing the 4 Instant appearing French inf, distracting the German Luftwaffe can easily be worth giving the Germans another ~14 IPCs for retaking France.

And last but not least:

5. Losing Moscow is not the end of the game. It really depends on the amount of losses the Germans take.
Attacking with everything and winning with 1 tank and 2 bombers remaining is a pyrrhic and the Axis are supposed to lose the game then.

Best,
Tobias
Here details matter: How smoothly can the Germans approach? How efficiently do the Russians retreat. How efficient does UK/US harass. It depends on little details here. In case you play online please upload a game file and I am happy to have a look and tell you if I find mistakes in the Allies’ play.