Best posts made by simon33

In a recent game, someone did a Java stack turn 1 with 3inf 1AAA 1tac and 5 fighters. Also, SZ42 had a DD to prevent bombardment. Now, the attack on the Philippines, with a J1 DOW, had a triple hit against the Japanese so only an artillery remained. Also, the Borneo transport could only bring inf. This made the attack on Java a 45% probability.

Perhaps optimal Axis moves would have meant losing a plane in the Philippines battle to keep an art and a tank (which could have been used rather than 2 art). Also, leaving an inf on Siam. Such moves would mean that an attack on Java would be a +7IPC battle on average https://goo.gl/ScnPJT .

So would such an attack be worth it for Japan? Did I leave a gap for the allies by keeping my planes in the Philippines battle? I’m inclined to think it probably would be worth it to trade plane for plane for Japan in this case.

Now if you have a bid, should you spend 10 of it to block such an attack by Japan? It then becomes a 40% battle. Perhaps the battle is still viable for Japan? Should you spend 20 to make it even harder?

Next thing is if the Allied planes get back to India, it becomes a very dodgy battle to take India J3, typically costing more than half the Japanese air force. Really don’t think that is worth it.

@Cow previously commented that the J3 India crush should work or at worst be deferred to J4. Perhaps he’s right if the Axis play optimally and there’s no bid units. Curious if he has any additional thoughts?

Thanks for the game. Perhaps it was a mistake to give you the shot at London G2. I don’t think I’ve ever seen that. UK was stretched pretty thin, but when it held on in London, I think the Axis were pretty doomed, unless Japan could bring out the victory. Would have been a more interesting game if you’d won. USA would have had to go hard to liberate London and Italy would have gone hog wild. I got unlucky in China when it counted and you looked like cleaning them up easily but India wasn’t in any danger anytime soon. USA was in danger of taking back money islands or at least making Japan fight for them.

@Midnight_Reaper I would say that example reinforces my contention that B-17s weren’t really useful for tactical attacks on land. Mainly B-24s did cover the Atlantic, not sure how much this was recon and how much actual bombing? I’m sure they made attempts to hit subs, probably some successful.

maybe. You get a benefit of zero as USSR from the point you lose Moscow. Sending a big chunk of troops to Finland and Norway makes this likely G6.

I love going after Norway as USA, but unless USA or UK help, it’s too much of a weakening of Moscow.

MrCunego (Allies+6) over Simon33 (Axis) BM3

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/33219/mrcunego-allies-6-vs-simon33-axis-bm3/97

@Adam514 said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:

@oysteilo Can you pinpoint something in BM that makes games last longer? My only answer is that sides are more equal, and since it’s a newer game people continue for a few more rounds before realizing they don’t have a chance.

It’s the increase in income without the increase in the number of units on the starting board which is sure to cause a longer game unless one side gets the advantage early. This makes the starting situation less important and mid game decisions are more likely to compensate for early game mistakes or dice.

Anyway, some may regard this change as a good thing although I’m not really on board with this viewpoint.

At this point I strongly encourage players to omit the Iwo Jima+Okinawa objective. Small beer perhaps but still a step in the right direction.

And I still feel that once the bids reach 10 and the Scottish fighter bid is possible that the game can no longer be considered “nearly balanced”.

@Argothair I know what you mean. I think the trouble is that it is very difficult to come up with a difinitive plan for the allies. You have to assume certain actions by the axis. I thought I had a pretty decent go at it but I did leave out a few points:

• Don’t make a naked push for Finland and Norway as USSR. Every man will be cut off and your troops may be killed or you can easily lose Moscow without those men. Or both. If you go after this, other allies, normally USA need to help out. And USA can’t there in time if there’s no J1/J2 DOW.
• A G1 DOW is normally stopped by flying planes into Moscow out of a Persia factory.
• Bid units may change the calculation for Ethiopia and Tobruk but sacrificing the building of a Persia factory UK2 is a large sacrifice.
• USSR running into Iraq is worth 5IPCs if you don’t house rule out the Spread of Communism objective for Asia/Africa. You probably should do so for Libya/Tobruk/Ethiopia/Italian Somaliland.
• Don’t let USSR troops get cut off in Leningrad or beyond without a good reason.
• Don’t stack Amur round 1.
• SZ92 stack may be stronger than the Taranto raid.
• Spanish beachhead strat ties up most of the US income.
• Don’t fall back from Bryansk unnecessarily. (should be obvious)
• Moscow can easily fall turn 6. Try to prevent this.
• When Moscow is going to fall, moving your troops to Samara can allow them to reach Caucasus, because many of the German infantry need to move to Moscow to prevent it being retaken. There is probably not a high fear of this when playing the standard rules because you can plunder Moscow twice.

@oysteilo said in Oysteilo (Allies) vs Simon33 (Axis) taamvan mode Game II:

1 out 20, come one! That is almost impossible

Yet it happened. My rolls were 2.33 hits below average, yours 6.33 hits.

Lucky me.

@trulpen said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:

And that means it can’t load a marine unless it’s going towards a sz where there’ll be amphi?

Correct.

I don’t think the marines were particularly well advised due the uncomfortable fit they have in the game mechanics. They don’t really add much, although they do make some of the island hopping encouraged by the new NOs easier to get.

I think that the bid required varies with skill level. When you first play the game the Axis are often too timid about declaring war, particularly with Japan. This really plays into the Allies’ economic advantage. Even once you understand this point, losing a few Japanese transports really slows you down as the axis. Also, gaining the knowledge of how weak Moscow really is and how much preferred it is to go after that, without being distracted, than going after London, changes European Axis’ moves.

Then there’s blockers and can opening.

Back to the question, so if you’re both complete novices playing straight up might see allied victory but when both are highly skilled bids might need to be 40+.

@FMErwinRommel said in League General Discussion Thread:

Has anyone tabulated the league game results to find out what % of games the Axis or Allies win in BM3 for a certain time period? I say BM3, because usually there’s no bid, whereas G40 results could be affected by different bid amounts. How about any other tabulation of results?

In 2018 it was 55% Axis victories on Balanced Mod, with varying bids. Interestingly, in 2017 it was 47% Axis. These figures are in the spreadsheet for prior years. There’s definitely a trend of increasing Axis victories and bids are increasingly going to the allies in increasing amounts.

Interesting, many things to like here.

Re: Mongolia the change makes it simple but it also nullifies Mongolia if the USSR wants to help China. Perhaps the new rule is too simple.

At first glance, I would have thought these changes would make it hard to win as Axis. But your play testing is that it is quite competitive? Hmm.

Are you sure you want to allow ICs to be built on Sumatra, Java, Borneo and Manilla? Perhaps unlikely to happen, unless Japan is getting hammered.

Don’t really follow why N Italy no longer connects to W Germany or France. Was the former just to prevent the W Germany -> Egypt flight? Or why Iwo Jima was moved to be a border island. Or why each of the money islands is now worth 1 less. I doubt making Siciily <-> Rome a walkable connection was a good move.

A couple of things I don’t think went far enough. No convoy zone in SZ5? No Canada as a playable power? Keeping plunder on first capture? No paratroopers? Still able to produce non-capital ships without naval bases?

Don’t really love the style of the new borders - they look like they were drawn by hand. Perhaps that’s a taste thing.

Particularly like the Med changes though. Crete & Malta become more important.

Have many people tried a strategy as Japan where you take FIC J1 but DOW J3? vs a regular J3 DOW you have 3 more units attacking Yunnan/Shan State and possibly Malaya. I always found it worked better to take FIC J1 with a J2 DOW but have never tried it with a J3 DOW, probably mostly because I haven’t done a J3 DOW for a long time. It costs 8IPC each of J1 & J2 but what exactly would you spend that 8IPC on when not at war anyway? Putting complexes on Shantung as well as Kiangsu? Getting that FIC complex two turns earlier is worth the price for Japan IMHO.

oysteilo (Allies) over simon33 (Axis) taamvan mode

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/33532/oysteilo-allies-vs-simon33-axis-taamvan-mode-game-ii/148

Interesting, perhaps outplayed, perhaps taamvan mode really gives the allies an advantage, perhaps some from column A and some from column B.

Assuming you’ve already tried exiting and restarting Triple-A (there are significant memory leaks), you could try increasing the max memory in the TripleA.vmoptions file in the root installation directory.

@barnee said in Distribution of units in the attack on SZ 110 and 111 G1:

Is it worth it to try and bait a scramble to 110 using a little less than optimal force ? Wouldn’t Taranto be off the table then ?

No, because the UK can use the fighter on Scotland for Taranto. And that’s even if Taranto is better than a SZ92 stack.

@axis-dominion said in Find League Opponents Thread:

hey all, been gone for a while, missing it a bit so would like to try to fit a&a into my life again, let’s see if I can do so without overdoing it again by taking on 10 games at a time :)

looking for a single M or E opponent, preferably someone who won’t move too fast and is ok with possibly a slower, once per day turn. Oh, and I am so rusty right now!

Great to have you back A-D.

Just a suggestion but a number of players didn’t want to accept your forfeits. Why don’t you pick one of them back up? I’m sure they’d be up.

@loki17 said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:

Will someone please do a feature request?

We play with tech and do not remove tokens option. Our group would like to be able to development more than one tech a turn. We would also like to have tokens assigned to the corresponding tech chart.

Thanks for your time and best regards.

The first option is already available. Just deselect “Remove all Tech Tokens at end of turn”.

Others could be player enforced. Seems like a hassle to me - could probably have two different techs and two resources.

Multiple tech per turn is completely against Global rules! I’m not sure why you want this so much. I’d rather have directed tech like Revised.

A couple of points:

• If you J1 DOW, it is unlikely ANZAC will have gotten all 3 of its starting fighters to India. That’s actually part of the strength of the J1 DOW.
• It is worth losing a few planes to take India. It isn’t worth losing most of your air force.
• Actually 8IPCs/turn for India - it’s a 3 IPC territory.
• Also get an IC for free.

I edited that in in the second post.