Posts made by shadowhawk

@ampdrive said in Scrambling Rule Question - Sealion:

@simon33 I think we all could agree that all sealion plans are not alike.I prefer to not be “all in” with sealion when I make my G1 buy.I’ll buy all air (or maybe 1dd+2 air) and access how G1 goes and what US and UK do before commiting to sealion or not.When Italys 1st turn is underway I know if it’s a go time for sealion.

True i guess i assumed a lot use the same thing for sea-lion and turn1.

Wondering how you attack the UK fleet with your buy, guess you also make some changes to my moves. I tend to use the BB to soak 1 damage and make sure its safe so it can be repaired.

@simon33 said in Scrambling Rule Question - Sealion:

It makes no sense to buy an aircraft carrier round 2. Better to spend the money on transports. You may buy an AC round 3 for your surviving planes to defend your transports. Also, committing to sea lion round 1 also makes no sense. Should only be done if UK leaves itself weak.

Makes sence to buy the AC round1 with either 2 transports or a destroyer + sub.
Fake out the sea-lion,
Enable more planes to attack the UK fleet,
Have a backbone for the baltic fleet.
Have the option to move into the med round 2 and help there.

The UK has to consider a sea-lion but that fleet can be used in so many ways, if they dont build/have enough airforce you can convoy them round 2 and possible round 3.
That fleet can be quite annoying untill the allies build up enough airforces to deal with it, but thats with every fleet in the game airforces will destroy them eventually.

@simon33 said in Scrambling Rule Question - Sealion:

@shadowhawk Why are you assuming that you have an aircraft carrier?

Taking 1-2 air units out of the land battle can make it more hazardous.

Most Sea-lion builds have an AC to protect the transports. It depends a little on what you do round 1 but you need some sea protection to avoid the scramble or a counter attack against your fleet.

If you have decent dice round 1 and you do it by the book sea-lion is pretty safe for germany.

You will have 20land units and a lot of air units, the Uk can only buy 2 times and starts off with limited forces at home. And the UK has to also account for other plans round1, buying only infantry basically sets the UK back more then a round in many other areas of the map.

If you strat bomb them and attack the airbase the UK has to repair some of the damage, so they can build even less, if they dont repair the airbase then well no scramble.

Sea-lion will be won by germany anyway its just a mather of how much losses they will have and how hard they can recover on the east front.

And the position of the US, bombing the AB should not make a huge difference, in a sea-lion italy is better used to take over gibraltar so the US also has to take that which might slow them down a round.

That or using their forces to push ahead in the middle-east before the UK can recover.

Bombing the Airbase even with 2 escorts if the UK has its airforces home you are going against 4-6 fighters and the Airbase AA gun.

Keeping the german surface fleet alive and having the extra carrier makes a much bigger difference, UK can only scramble 3 fighters so even against a BB-cruiser-carrier they might even lose, 1 or 2 german air units make the scramble not worth it.

@dazedwit

As germany you dont have the option really, if russia plays defensive and stacks you either have 1 big stack or get taken out piece by piece.

If they really stack leninggrad hard you just go there first with your stack and take out the bigger part of their army.

1 big stack cannot really be held by russia, so soon you birdcage them and then you reinforce from 3 factories closeby where russia has only income for a few infantry.

@dazedwit said in The Afrika Korps:

@Afrikakorps

I have new ideas for this strategy.

G4 Sealion with all out economic warfare of convoys and SBR starting G1. The amount of money you can remove in first 3 turns is most of their income - lot less inf defending London. (The way you get there is up to you but new strat I want to try - buy AB and destroyer - you can also buy a trns or carry over the money. 2 subs to 106 - or if you’re frisky, one sub, and save the other to convoy 119;
2 subs to 91 to take out UK cruiser;
1 sub, 1 ftr to 109;
1 BB, 3 Tac, 2 ftr to 110

What would stop me from scrambling 4 fighters in SZ109, just wondering there is a verry good chance of killing both fighter and sub for just 1 destroyer ( or 1 fighter )

The BB in SZ110, can be attacked by the UK fleet of 1 BB 1 cruiser 1 destroyer with 3 fighters and 1 bomber. Could remove the bomber to do taranto, if you want to scramble 3 fighters in defence thats ok with me.

As UK gibastion is not an option now but you have a working BB in the area so id love to trade that for the german BB and a bunch of airforce.

Also 110 thats 1 BB 3 tacs and 2 fighters, so 3x@3 and 3@4 against the UK+scramble of 2x@3 and 4x@4 not a bad gamble for the UK to take either.

The whole defenceless transport rules should be revised as now they still dont fix the issue if long tedious combat.
Currently if i got 100 transport and the enemy attacks with 1 sub, but i have an airbase and 1 fighter i can scramble. At that point i do have a unit that can shoot back so the rule does not apply and the enemy has to make 100kills with the sub.

Or if i got 20AA guns and the enemy attacks with 1 mech. Do we really want to roll dies till he hits 20x a 1?

Just make the rule simple.
If at the start of a round of combat the defender has units left that can be attacked and the defender has no units that can hit any attacking units then the units without combat value are removed from play.

So no more rolling dice to hit AA guns, and no more 2 subs hitting a AC + figher + 10 transports having to kill every transport manually.

@Krieghund said in Know The Rules: How Boats Can Move 4 Spaces:

@shadowhawk said in Know The Rules: How Boats Can Move 4 Spaces:

@Krieghund

The rules for retreat do not require that the move is legal. Only that the SZ you retreat to is friendly and that at least 1 sea unit came from there.

By that logic, you can ignore the rules for canals and narrow straits when making a combat move or a noncombat move, or when moving using a naval base, as none of these rules mention them either. The fact is that the rules for canals and narrow straits apply to all movement of sea units, as they say they do.

True the book and especially the rules regarding retreat are badly worded sometimes.
Retreat however is not a move so it ignores most movement rules.

But it hardly mathers its theoretical and only applies to gibraltar at best. As subs can move through but others cant. How many times do you have a fleet on 1 side a sub on the other side and an enemy fleet in exactly the right spot to abuse it.

Same as that units cannot move more then their max speed but when retreating you also violate this movement rule by retreating to the other side.

This is an entirely different case, as retreat movement is an explicitly-stated rules exception. You can actually violate the maximum movement of units by retreating in any direction. Infantry that move 1 space into combat and then retreat back where they came from have moved 2 spaces, even though they ended up back where they came from. The only difference is that since they return to where they came from, we don’t perceive that they have actually moved, so we accept it.

Retreat rules are just badly worded, it should just be that units retreat to where they came from. That cannot be abused and it makes it logical.

@Krieghund

The rules for retreat do not require that the move is legal. Only that the SZ you retreat to is friendly and that at least 1 sea unit came from there.

Though its completely insane to allow the move if you follow the rules that are in the book then you can do this move.

Same as that units cannot move more then their max speed but when retreating you also violate this movement rule by retreating to the other side.

Only way to really solve it is to rewrite the retreat rules so that units must retreat to the zone they came from, so you can never retreat more units of a single type to a zone then the units that came from that zone.

@dazedwit

Yea you can even use that to move your axis ships through the gibraltar straight without actually owning gibraltar. Just have 1 sub attack from the other side and you can retreat through a seazone you cannot even sail through.

Its just one of these rules that you can abbuse because they simplified the combat part. It would be difficult to keep track of what comes from where.

@dazedwit

Is this any different then what germany does with its forces? Attack a country and then retreat in the other direction you came from?

Yes retreat can be abbused a lot and is abbused a lot in this fashion to give units more range then they should have. Its just 1 of those mistakes in the rules that make the game more playable.

@barnee

Its a lot easier, fly from midway and land in russia. Not ideal but its a lot easier then the doolittleraid where they had to travel halfway between midway and japan just to fly the bombers.

@Hansolo88 said in Pacific so small:

I mostly just find it frustrating that US can’t move ships from E Coast to UK in 1 turn even with Naval Base bonus. It discourages historical outcomes, and encourages ahistorical outcomes (US building up forces on the tiny rock of Gibraltar instead). It’s one of my biggest complaints with the 1940 board, alongside Northern Italy being able to nonsensically access Central France.

US can chose to go from canada to the UK in 1 turn.
It also is unclear what a turn is really because some moves especially air are really weird.

Yea building up in north afrika or gibraltar is a bit wierd but that is because gibraltar is a lot closer to italy then it should be. And still close to norway and normandy.

It the same thing with the pacific where you can ignore the island mostly. A bomber from midway can get to nearly everywhere in the pacific. In reality it was a lot harder to bomb japan.

@PGsquig said in Anyone ever used Ceylon?:

@dazedwit When Calcutta falls, there is often no naval battle whatsoever. You would be better off spending the money on more infantry which will help your land defense rather than investing in infrastructure which will likely not be used. Any Anzac fighters can be used to defend the land territory of Calcutta and will have much more utility than if they were used in a sea battle.

Even if there were a naval battle before an amphibious assault on Calcutta, only if the UK Pacific’s navy is large enough to nearly win a battle against the Japanese navy would a second airbase be useful. If your UK Pacific navy is strong enough to stand toe-to-toe with the Japanese navy, either something disastrous has happened to the Japanese navy (in which case the Allies probably have the game in the bag) or you have nearly no UK Pacific land units (in which case the Japanese army will walk their way to Calcutta and ignore your boats).

Depends if Germany does something really weird you might be able to afford pulling the med navy back to india. If your pacific fleet consists of 3 destroyer 2 cruiers 1 BB and loaded carrier adding another 6 planes to the defence might really make it hard to japan to overcome that. IT wont be a walk in the park.

It could be something like letting 110 survive and then when you group at gibraltar having bad dice and losing the italian navy for no real damage to the UK navy.

But then again japan can then just dont invade and first take out the fleet and then a turn later invade anyway.

@Black said in Fall of the West:

Is it possible for the Axis to achieve victory in the Atlantic if they remain at peace with the Soviets throughout the war?

That is to say, is it still possible for the Allies to win in Europe without the involvement of the USSR? My opponent and I were just discussing how Axis victory would be achievable without taking the Soviet VCs, but Soviet possible interference (i.e. USSR DOW) prevents them from focusing their full attention on the west.

Do the Allies NEED the help of the USSR to win the war?

Well Russia will be a threat you have to defend against but i think even without USSR UK and US can make enough money.
Though without USSR you could just do a sea-lion and then you will be able to beat the US.

The problem is on multiple areas of the board not only the pacific.

It does unbalance the game a lot though, but that also goes for the islands that actually take 1 space to get into so you can attack the whole SZ but not the island itself.

Its for playability, otherwise the pacific would be a epic slugfest where you need to capture nearly every island just to have a base for your airpower.

@dazedwit said in I'm tinkering around with a new German opener - ignoring SZ 110:

@shadowhawk

I will give it a shot. I googled AA G40 online and it brought me to a Steam website and I think asking for money?

Do you have a link so I can check it out and get a feeling for it before we play>

O dont use that crappy steam thing.

Google TripleA : https://triplea-game.org/

There you can download a client just need to get the maps but thats easy.

Its free or charge and allows all kinda of versions and it allows for forum play on here. So it can automatically upload your move writen and with a savegame to download for the other player.

Think there is even a guilde on this forum as well.

@dazedwit said in I'm tinkering around with a new German opener - ignoring SZ 110:

@shadowhawk

ah, yes, always forget about Cyprus. Now I know that when Gibbastion happens, Italy sends one trn to Cyprus instead of Egypt

This is my first time playing out the Gibbastion so I’m still learning. Hmm, maybe Italy drops two blockers and rest of fleet in Syria taking Syria and Cyprus.

I avoided keeping entire Italy fleet together because if I was UK I would smell a rat. I figured splitting them up would negate that response.

So, send all the planes but keep all the boats in SZ 92. That will be really tough to stop a sealion. Germany will send blockers on the turn they buy trns. If planes were still in London/Gibralter they could clear the blockers and the boats could NC to 110 and then less planes for London attack since they will be needed to clear the water first.

Playing this out for the first time, I would rec sending the boats after Italy and keeping as many planes as possible on Gib. Those planes should be enough to save London.

Granted, this rec is because Germany has been convoying max 11/turn and London IC at 20 damage so very limited defensive units placed in London per turn. If Germany wasn’t going full economic warfare, you don’t have to worry about London at this point. Economic Warfare can be laughed off turn one, but turn two it really starts to hurt, and turn 3 you are in full blown panic. Germany focusing on removing money from London removes 8-13 inf from London. Set up your typical Sealion battle on the battle board - then remove 10 UK inf. The battle is over after two rounds and Germany usually has a few inf left. If I’m planning a sealion and UK buys a ftr turn one I rejoice - they need inf and nothing else until the possibility of sealion passes. That extra ftr does no good if battle is over after two rounds. Those extra 3 inf ,might extend the battle to round 3, and the ftrs can possibly eat into tanks.

The UK AB turn one removes 5 inf from London that Germany had no part in, and makes Sealion that much more likely I think.

I’m going to have to set this up multiple times and try different paths, etc to get a full grasp of all sides - and learn what to do as UK and Axis in response.

The Gibbastion is very intimidating, but I feel there are cracks in the strat that can be exploited.

Every strat has cracks that can be expoited.
The blockers italy uses are useless as the french can clear them.
Also you just assume you will always do max damage with your bombing runs, what if i just shoot down those bombers with AA fire from the factory. You did 4 2x2 bombers runs so there is a good chance1 bomber is already dead by now. Its luck based.

Your transports are defenceless and you can buy a lot less of them, i can still move my fleet into SZ110. Every move as a counter move. Leaving SZ110 is risky, i could not have done this gibraltar move and actually killed the whole german fleet UK1 and smashed your tobruk forces at the same time. That would also be an option.

Leaving expensive units that dont have proper defence alive is almost never a good idea.

But like i offered before we can play here by forum using tripleA if you want. Just a lot more convenient and you can always make a video of it if you really want to. Not like you cant throw dice and then put them with the right side up to represent what was thrown.

@dazedwit

If 1 unit attacks 1 unit and both destroy eachother then there is no defenceless transport so it will stay alive. As the combat is over and all surviving units get back to the game board.

The french can take out the fleet off egypt on their turn so when UK comes around there should be no stuff there. Af S-france is taken before then ofcourse they would move to gibraltar. They would never ever move to a location where they can be easy destroyed by air. So they would never be in the convoy zone near italy.

Also the fighter from gibraltar can also hit that SZ and if i looked correctly they both can land on a tiny island in that SZ as well cyprus i think. So no need to move the AC anywhere.
The airbase on gibraltar gives your units 1 more range.

The french cruiser + figher can take care of the german destroyer so next turn your fleet can move into SZ109 and kill the subs.

You could move 1 fighter + cruiser against the italian fleet of egypt but the french can handle that the next turn if S-france was taken then they would be near gibraltar and have plenty of range. the italian fleet isnt going anywhere.

@dazedwit

Yea should have taken te fighter as tactical is more expensive and more powerfull.

No need to use the fleet to kill the italian fleet just nuke it with air and keep fleet where it is. Ofcourse destroy the german destroyer as well. Keep the fleet in a nicely annoying position and with italy not having any fleet anymore and france taking the spot off egypt at least that front is sort of secured.

Using the fleet would take it way to far out of position, with no german destroyers around the next turn those 3 subs are dead. No more convoy damage.

Get a transport off the S-afrikan coast and transport the 2 inf next turn.
Also use the transport to take persia for extra units. And deadzone egypt. No need for senseless dying there let the anzac take the brunt and be able to counter with a decent force.