Posts made by OpTorch

@AgentSmith:

1. Keep BB and original transport by Italy along with the purchased transport which makes for a moderate sized Navy.

But it will certainly end up a waste. As the Brits I would land ftrs in Cauc, and reinforce with Russians once this happens this fleet is toast. If it moves to the Atlantic its killed and if it stays in the med it is also killed. The problem I have is what does this do get you 2more infantry in Africa. By the way Germany doesn’t need or shouldn’t place large amounts of troops in Africa. Africa should be a distraction/sidebar, so that when the Allies go to retake it Germany can squeeze Karelia. Anymore than that is a waste. Further if you miss my sub I will send a bmb sub versus this fleet, and you’ll end up getting very little for your investment.

In a bid game, this could enable the German Navy to escape into the Indian ocean which opens up different options (Madagascar, India?, Australia?, New Zealand, or how about Brazil with the bonus of the German navy in S. Atlantic to prevent shipment of troops to S. Africa by transport?). While this is somewhat duplication of what Japan could do, it could force the Allies to react to a situation they have not seen before.

No way. No good Allied player is going to let that fleet just roam around. I would advise to always make it priority number one in the first few turns. If it costs 1-2 aircraft sobeit.

A 4 inf EEu, 1 trn CMD, 1 inf Lib, 1 ipc Ger bid orso can make the trn bid worthwhile and it will be very tough to kill this fleet anytime soon. Furthermore you will be very flexible to send the Afrika units back to Europe if that will give you a decisive advantage (a R1 Ukraine attack might result in such a situation). I dont think that buying a trn in G1 will give the same results/options even remotely.

What units do you send for pearling after Man-Kwa attack by russians and uk?

@APolaris:

In this topic I think it’s pointless to talk about how hard any capital is to capture. In theory, all should be impossible in a game less than 50 rounds if players used all their money on buying infantry for their capitals every round, because of the sheer fact that no one country can get more units to another capital in less than 2-3 turns from their own (exception: UK to Germany). In that amount of time the player could stack many more infantry than the person could get to his/her capital on time. So we can’t talk about how hard any capital is to take because in theory all of them should be impossible.

If you are buying inf only, you cant maintain a high or equal income. The player who buys inf only will be outproduced by his opponent and it will take not many rounds to finish the game once this starts.

Example: huge trade off in round 1 and 2 between Russians and Germans, both lose their arm. Spa landings are interesting once Ger hasnt got any arm.

Yep :)

Back in the 80’s when I went on holiday w/my parents I used to play 1 player A&A.

@DarthMaximus:

The point of waiting is to sychronize the attack with Germany. Now Germany hits Karelia and Japan hits Novo, and since they waited they now have 26 inf in Novo instead of 12. Russia can’t take both. Your tanks may allow you to hit both Ger and Japan, but by attacking in the same round you negate that. It just takes some planning.

We are not talking about the situation where Rus has its arm in Mos and the inf in Nov anymore, right (since the Japs wouldnt be in Sin/Yak to strike Nov b/c of the deadzone)?

This means that Rus arm is prolly in Kar so extra inf can go to Mos. If thats not enough to keep the Japs out of Nov than something has gone very wrong for the allies (only when Ger has taken Kar early -> weak Russians, but we are not talking about that I pressume, since Ger is pressuring Kar).

Im just not sure what you mean by Rus arm cant attack both……

This is of course country and board dependant.

Let me give another example.

Your example of 24 inf attacking for instance 12 inf, 6 arm. Defender will hold on average w/2 arm.

Now instaed use 14 inf, 6 arm in attack (same ipc value): attackers would win w/3 arm on average.

Both our attacking armies should win on average in defense (of course, the inf stack has higher odds).

Now if you use this principle w/Rus who can use 1 stack of arm to threaten 3 important countries at once (EEu, Yak, Sin) w/Inf in Kar and Nov and you know why a decent arm purchase by the Russians is interesting and a problem for the axis (as long as defense holds of course).

Problem with attacking inf is that the variance is so big. 15 hits w/60 inf? You might as well hit 6 times (both chances arent that big btw).

So the russians didnt fortify UK….not to wise (would need to check the odds)…but what happened in Kar?

If you would read this thread a bit mor closely you would see that a lot of it is already out there. I am not going to spell it out more.

True, this sounds a bit like Nuno, with one difference. This must be about the first time I have made a reserved response, where Nuno does this all the time. :)

As far as your comment: I dont agree

btw, did you base your player strength judgement on analysing our dicelogs?…. ;)

I must decline respectfully. There are a few pearls I dont want to share and this is one of them. What I can share is that part of it is the surprise effect, part of it is a strong (inf) presence in Asia and an important part among others is flexibilty….

Between you and me, the US ist they key most of the time when its Jap vs the rest, so I hear ya when you say US is weakest. I have taken advantage more often than not (I had expected these opponents to see the problems coming). I think you have to very very carefull to say the least when you are fighting a strong Japan, even when Germany is down.

I think when determing the strongest country you might need to define what you are looking for. Strong in attack, strong in defense, strong in the beginning, strong in the end, flexibility etc.

A.

A strong Japan can beat all 3 allies on its own, with Ger down, so Id say Japan is the strongest.