Best posts made by MarshmallowofWar

@panther Success now as apparently I thought “of” had a capital “O” and the forums did not.

@crockett36 said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):Risk, reward tips in your favor. Nothing more. In poker one would raise I think.

Mixing poker and AA – that would be an interesting game!

I’m not in Houston, but I’ll be visiting family in Conroe for the bulk of November if you want a game. You’ll need to host though.

Marsh

Congratulations, your bid made me change my opener!

@AndrewAAGamer said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):

In another face to face game I only had a 48% chance to take Moscow and end the game. I was not planning on taking it. However, my Partner suffered an excruciating loss of the IJN on his Turn and suddenly we had no choice. It was either attack now at 48% or next Turn it would only be worse odds and things would go downhill for us all over the board. So I made the attack at 48% because I had to; it was a reasonable risk. BTW I won. :) Geez that pissed off our opponents.

Nah, what pissed us off was that we offered the guy playing Russia a UK fighter and he turned it down because he wanted his 5 IPCs.

No one minds losing a coin flip. What we minded was that it didn’t need to be a coin flip!

@AndrewAAGamer There was not much left of the German stack, but I don’t recall how much. I do recall that there was too much for Russia to counterattack, so probably four or five units. Still, the fighter would have made a difference.

Out of box, hands down.

Here’s what you do:

1. Practice the mocking jig.
2. Take the Allies.
3. When the Axis when, do the mocking jig against your opponents and complain that they can’t win without a stacked deck.

Seriously though, out-of-box is tougher. The Allies opening moves are not “glorious” and game-shattering, and newer players tend to be impatient to make those big moves.

@Contango gave good advice. Work on basics, learn what works and what doesn’t, and review other games. There are some pretty basic Allied moves that span the first few turns that can really set you up for success. At the end of the day, the Allies are about two things – logistics and teamwork. Master those two things and even OOB the Allies have a decent shot against most players.

Most of all, have fun! Enjoy these early games where you’re still learning lot of new things and feel freedom to experiment!

Marsh

Yes, it does not matter which territory the troops on the transport are invading. The amphibious assault is in the sea zone adjacent to a territory with an airbase, which is all that is required.

Marsh

@shadowhawk said in Beating J1:

And the russian units can be back well before moscow is under threath.

I love it when the Allied player believes this. Anything you sent to China other than planes is not going to make it back.

Marsh

@shadowhawk A curious thing happens when the US ignores Japan to go “full bore” on Germany. The Allies lose.

To be less brief, Japan does not need all those planes to win. Certainly they help, but if the US ignores the Pacific Japan can project power wherever it needs. Money islands? Locked up. India income constrained? No problem.

By moving Russian units into China, you create a situation where the Russian units have to move last and you have to know where they’ll be moving on the previous US turn. It’s rather easy to mess those things up. Mess it up and the Russian units die cheap.

Is it worth sacrificing a couple of Japanese planes to keep four Russian units out of Moscow? Yes, and I might get the plane too.

So yeah, whatever you send to ChinaRussia ain’t coming back (assuming my plan is to win by crushing Russia).

EDIT: Corrected Russia to China in final paragraph.

@tchenao The Strait of Gibraltar is both deeper and wider than the strait of Denmark.

However, don’t let that fool you into thinking that the game designers actually took accuracy (either historically or geographically) into serious account. Had they done so…

• Scotland would have a naval base present on the board.

• Iceland would be a pro-Allied neutral waiting to be activated by an Allied power.

• Any ability of mechanized units to blitz through eastern Russia or Southeast Asia would be removed.

• and numerous other changes!

Marsh

@crockett36 said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):

@marshmallowofwar I guess I didn’t realize we were in a debate, but rather assumed it was a cooperative free for all that might lead to either a confirmation of standard doctrine or the discovery of innovative ideas that might change the balance of power. Thanks for your thoughts.

It’s not a debate, but part of any cooperative discussion has to be asking questions.

Nothing @AndrewAAGamer has said makes me change my opinion that in at least some circumstances DD+CC > BB. The BB only has more value when there are enough smaller units to shield it from taking the second hit. If we should be wringing every possible advantage out of the build, DD+CC gives a bit more advantage than BB.

From the perspective of supporting shore bombardment, 5 cruisers gives on average 2.5 hits while three battleships gives on average 2 hits for the same IPC cost. (However, I believe that only one support shot per loaded transport is allowed; if so that would increase the cost of the landing by at least 7IPCs.)

From the offensive/defensive perspective DD + CC gives a small edge over BB in early combat rounds (the ones that matter most) AND chance of am early second hit when the BB can only get one hit.

DD + CC puts more units on the board to allow smaller task forces to exist to cover transports.

Are cruisers overpriced? Absolutely, and the real cost should be 11 IPCs (or maybe even 10…), but I build cruisers more often than I build battleships.

@arthur-bomber-harris said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):

@crockett36 Normandy should be left completely unoccupied by the time the Allies have a sizable landing force. As you mentioned, there can be considerable devastation to any Axis force situated in that territory and it cannot be reasonably defended without diverting from the main goal of crushing Moscow or heading into the Middle East/Egypt. Normandy or Norway will fall, it just is a matter of on which round and whether the Axis will be able to retake it with a counterattack of ground units supported by planes. France is the best place to have the Axis counterstrike infantry/artillery. Mechanized units can help counterstrike from W Germany. Usually, though, a wave of UK fighters add enough defensive might to Normandy or Norway to ensure that the Axis are unable to strike back.

Agree with most of this, but as I’ve said on other threads I try not to take Normandy at all until Russia is captured (and there’s absolutely no way I would have forces sitting there waiting to be bombarded). Sometimes taking Normandy is unavoidable, but Normandy without a US factory is a much easier nut to crack than Normandy with a US factory!

Marsh

@jscam74 Funny how those 0% likely results happen a lot! The Dice Goddess is a fickle one.

Just so are all aware, the ANZAC infantry in New Guinea is not a legal bid.

Marsh

@freh Ok, I see it now. Pretty sneaky :)

Well, there are perhaps two ways that can happen early enough for it to matter:

1. Build a carrier and two transports on G1. On G2, move to sea zone 91 and take Gibraltar and Morocco), but you had better make sure that the UK can’t kill you in that sea zone (Italy had better own Algeria, meaning only UK naval units and start bombers can hit you). On G3, move to sea zone 82 and accomplish landings in Gold Coast, Nigeria, and French West Africa. On G4, amphibiously assault South Africa.
2. On G1, take Southern France. On G2, build a carrier and two transports in sea zone 93 and move sufficient forces to fill the transports to Southern France. On I2, Italy takes Gibraltar to secure passage for your fleet. On G3, move to sea zone 87 and land in French West Africa. On G4, move to sea zone 82 taking Gold Coast and Nigeria amphibiously. On G5, land in South Africa. If they’re alive, your remaining German naval units could join up with the new fleet in the Atlantic or you could hit South Africa in two waves.

The first one requires eliminating landing zones for UK aircraft that can hit sea zone 91, which requires some commitment from Italy. The second one requires much less help from Italy

Both of these require you to be able to go into the Atlantic without being threatened by the UK and US fleets. If you eliminated most of the UK fleet on G1 and the US is not yet at war, this is easy. Otherwise, not so much.

Both of these are incredibly obvious. The first gives the UK less time to prep, but the second is a bit less expected by the UK and South Africa is more likely to be weak. On the other hand, your landing force is also weaker by two ground units.

Either way you’ve taken two planes, four to six ground units, and 30 IPCs out of any attack against Russia.

A third option would be a Sea Lion build on G2, but you ignore the UK and basically do the first plan with a massive amount of transports. South Africa will surely die, but Germany will die later because so much money was spent taking Africa.

Marsh

First, Taranto is not a “must do” on UK1.

Second, destroying the German battleship is not a “must do” on UK1.

In both cases, the Allies must build fleets before they can truly exert pressure on the Axis. Not attacking them on UK1 gives the Axis powers a choice – focus on the objective that will win the game, namely capturing victory cities in Russia and the Middle East, OR enter a naval arms race that cannot be sustained if the Axis intends to win the game.

Yes, that’s correct – an arms race. To keep the battleship, it must be defended and Germany must spend additional income on air and naval units to keep it alive – that is money not being spent on building forces necessary to secure the VCs in Russia and the Middle East. To keep the Italian battleship, Italy must dedicate all its paltry income to keeping it alive, making it difficult if not impossible to assist Germany in the East.

The Allies do not have to do either of these battles on UK1 (though doing one would be prudent and I would argue the Allies have to do one of them, but not both). In both cases the Allies have other options that will result in the destruction of those Axis assets with absolute certainty in just a few more turns unless the Axis enters an arms race to protect those assets.

Marsh

@squirecam said in Bismarck or Taranto?:

Italy keeping its fleet is its key to gaining more than a paltry income. There is more than one way to win and you dont just have to crush russia before turn 6.

I never said you had to crush Russia before turn 6 – however, it IS necessary to push the Russians back to Moscow so that at least two victory cities are within reach and the way through the Middle East is open. Building more ships and planes to protect a battleship does not help with that and gives Russia time.

Italy, with or without fleet, is gimp unless the player runs the UK like a complete idiot. No matter what, Italy’s battleship cannot lead to higher income unless the UK doesn’t do what is necessary to secure the Med.

Marsh