Posts made by Magister

Do you refer ONLY to the Turn 1 Sealion based on ‘surprise’ long-range-air ? That is forbidden competitively as far as I know, either explicitly (Turn 1 special rule) or the delayed tech in LHTR.

Or do you refer to the Turn 2 try (after building 2-3 transports, as in the Canadian Shield plan of Caspian_Sub) or the option for Turn 3 with 5 more transports built Turn 2 for a total of 9 ?

Germans - keep an eye not to fall in the reverse trap of ‘successful Dieppe’. Good Luftwaffe exposed in France with too few inf, being invaded Turn 1 by British 2inf 1art 1tnk 2ftr 1bmb (1btl support) with relatively little cost.

Didn’t play many Diplomacy-like games, but what would prevent forming of spontaneous coalitions (even without explicit communication) in a Free-for-all ? Maybe even along historical WW2, driven by geography, accessible enemies and territories of value:
Germany+Japan vs Russia
Russia+England vs Germany
Russia+England+US vs Japan

Maybe even earlier or alt-history variants (e.g. Japan+England vs Russia).

Then what happens if 2 powers besiege the third (say Germany+Japan vs Moscow) ? if any one attacks, the other may win easily whoever wins the first one. So the situation would become a stable triangular deterrence ?

For the mid-game I found very effective two slow (inf+arty) Soviet stacks in Caucasus and Novosibirsk with a good tank reserve built in Moscow threatening 5 approaches !

The Novo hedgehog has the advantage of keeping separate the Siberian and Chinese approaches.

Still don’t know a good way to defend against a Japanese southern main approach (India-Persia) combined with major German pressure, both with flank harassment on other approaches.

1. Do you refer to the Yakut stack ? It can be as low as 3-4 inf. What Japanese threat can be in Buryat after 1 round ? (Except here the case of a Japanese transport bid). On Turn 2-3 the situation changes, the decision is whether to put enough troops to hold, or withdraw to Novosibirsk and threaten an ‘interior position’ counterattack.
   1’) Then Buryat is to have a 1 inf delayer left, or empty ? Japan may want all troops for China anyway.
   1") More important is if fighters are in range (Moscow) or not. Counterattacking Buryat is not the best business (as Japan may counter with battleships too, often ‘free’ shots).

2. Sinkiang can receive 2inf, may help hold on Turn 2 or threaten counterattack (with tank/s back) if China has few Jap survivors.

3. Persia can receive 2inf, may help hold India on Turn 2.

All these help ‘stop the Japanese in the beginning’…

TripleA is just as crystal clear the option to submerge subs is BEFORE attacker’s retreat. Programmers consulted with a rules guru…
And many games are going around with TripleA, almost a de-facto standard. Or not ??

One TripleA TSVG comprises all the history so far up to a position. The format is compressed or coded somehow, unparseable as text anyway. One may understand the format from the Open source.

Loading the TSVG into TripleA, it can reconstitute the position at any moment between actions - including at end of R1 of any turn. TripleA also does some good summaries inside, including IPC incomes and total unit values by countries and Axis/Allies.

Akreider2 - great ideas ! I’m also a fan of statistics.

I can send you >50 games in TripleA 0.902 and some in 0.821. A lot are also in the archives of Tripleawarclub.org

Obviously, the predicted probability of victory should either assume equal skill, or include the difference in skill (assuming previous experience is relevant). Look about the theory behind ELO and like ratings in chess. It’s quite likely that a poor player may ruin an ‘equal’ position, or need more real luck to win.

OK, back to Africa ! Let’s discuss when each of these choices are better:

-German bid: tnk/art in Algeria/Libya, or tnk/inf, or tra with Med fleet, or “half” (tnk Algeria, arty Japan) or elsewhere that may still have indirect effect on Africa (sub sz8, tra Japan) ? or just troops in Russia ?
-G1: fleet west (inf to Gibraltar) or east ? how much air support to land and fleet ? when it can be meaningful to NOT attack Egypt ?

• UK1: counterattack Egypt or not ? where to land planes surviving: bmb+ftr ? bmb alone ? [Looks dead, as it used 5 moves to attack, and any neighbor of Egypt is in range of German bmb from Libya] or lose bmb and land ftr ?
• If UK1 counterattack, G2 to re-attack Egypt ?
• Can the panzer run be stopped before South Africa (with the inf+ftr or more troops) ?
• What Allies to liberate Africa: UK+US or US alone ? starting how fast ? from Algeria alone, or a separate landing vs tank in French Equatorial ? Allied effort to stop at some time, or continue to Caucasus/India etc ? [I’ve found massive Japanese/German fighters defending Egypt useful mostly if the Allied flow stopped]
• Axis strive to control the Suez - how hard ? then move Italian ships east, or Japanese west ?
• Build more Italian fleet ? what use for ?
• Second US fleet to continue advancing in Med ? what’s the deadliest threat ?

Playing cards for randomization (keeping Ace-6) maybe 2 or 4 packs shuffled together. Each card is just as random as a d6 (without knowing the other). All together keep the average guaranteed. Maybe shuffle them all back when few of them (say <10) remain in the deck to prevent “knowing” the remainder is better/worse if the history so far has been worse/better.

I prefer transports too for Japan - 5-7 in all. One factory usually in French Indochina T4 or 5… and finally one in Novosibirsk when enough Japs to survive there - for the final siege of Moscow. 3 tanks 2 turns away are nothing like 2 arty right next to the target.

Unfortunately most of my losing games involved some mismanagement of Africa, for either side !

What I think:

• Africa can be safely neglected for a quick 6-8 turn rush-to-Moscow German game.
• Africa’s income may be decisive for slower, balanced games.

Controlling it with not too much investment is the true key. A balance of IPC’s invested vs. IPC income flow between all theaters of action: Africa, Europe, Asia and everywhere…

I think a whole “treatise” may describe the possible complexities here… land, sea, air, ally cooperation…

[The vast majority of conversations on dice have missed the central fact that when “luck” occurs, it is more likely to be bad than good.]

For ‘normally’ favourable attacks the distribution of outcomes is skewed with a ‘long left tail’.
That means good luck is MORE frequent than bad luck - but the rare bad luck can be much farther from the average than the good cases.
Attackers also have the really useful option to stop an attack and withdraw after 1, 2… rounds. Defenders don’t. I estimated the option value at some +5% in attacking forces.

The practical psychology thing is: the human brain is more of an unfairness detector than a general-purpose logic device. Careful tests have shown bad events are easier detected and more memorable. All games involving some luck are great examples…

(Backgammon) is a game of skill and luck.
If you win it’s skill; if you lose it’s luck.

More important practically: Russia forgets about moving the sub (yes, to sz2 with UK btl tra) say in 5-10% of games.

• What are best German exploits ?
• What are best Allied ways to mend ?

What about Germany+UK vs everyone else ?
<what if=“” edward=“” viii=“” was=“” not=“” dethroned=“”></what>

I remember I built a factory in France around Turn 12 when the situation obviously demanded it: Germany had conquered all Russia and Africa and US besieging Japan to the home island and one Asian coast area, with naval guerilla against all the (nominally German) coast.

France would be a good place from where Germany could start to add pressure to  UK/US fast enough…

A destroyer has the cost of 1.5 transports, firepower of 3 and endurance of 1.
Then why not a carrier ? At the cost of 2 trans, can land the fighter meant for Wake for a firepower of 7… and decisively deterring a KJF.

• Atlantic: it’s essential to show that UK (after Germany) is the moment to think of naval moves of the WHOLE alliance ! Any discordant UK-US moves will impact badly !

• Unification in SZ8 is quite good; for the benefits of beginners or those without access to simulators it’s necessary to show that basic forces (UK btl 2tra US des 2tra RUS sub) can hold only up to GER 4ftr bmb. More German threat (planes, fleet closer), and SZ8 will need reinforcing by UK (more tra, maybe car+US planes etc).
• If unifying in SZ8, they still cannot reach to attack SZ5 Baltic in Turn 2.
• When is an early SZ12 unification with UK+US landing to Africa advantageous ?

• Africa: being so important in the long term, it is worth detailing the long term strategy to defend/retake its IPC without diverting too much from Europe. Should US do it alone, or UK+US etc. From Morocco, or a component to West Africa ? etc.
  In what way an Egypt counterattack on Round 1 or 2 helps ? (At least they delay a German tank blitz to the inside)

• Pacific: so much to discuss even theater-analysis article won’t be enough…

When Japan reaches Novo in enough strength to hold: buy factory and turn 2 arty right on Moscow’s doorstep ! Much more effective than 3 tanks in factories 2 turns away…

Could you have 5 transports in A60 ? (The original one and 4 bought if 2 IPC left from bid)
Could you counterattack Buryat ? (3inf 1art some ftr/bmb)

Mazer: I like your progression ! Do you push primarily against Persia/Caucasus or Novosibirsk ? I mean, if Russia has a serious counterattack force so that Japan can only have one route in force. Having a slow mid-sized force down other routes is a great waste… cannot advance without being killed/badly strafed, but cannot help other routes.

I did similarly, but usually ending with 3 factories and 5 transports (of which 2 run around islands etc. and 3 shuttle methodically from Japan). First round of purchases from factories - inf, then add enough arty, at times 1-2 rounds of tank-only make a great ‘cumulative charge’ effect at distances of 3-4 areas from factories. That means, 2 rounds of production arrive in 1 turn.