Posts made by TimTheEnchanter

@Romulus:

@Cmdr:

@Mazer:

I categorically reject this false “choice”.

There was not ONE tank listed in the options, when, in fact, we all know that tanks are STRONG!

Yea, but now seriously, which do you think is most important?

Another thought, naval pieces cannot be most important since they cannot take capitols or victory cities. :P

While UK bomber can?

Exactly my thought.

Frankly I don’t think the bomber is even the UK’s most valuable unit.  I’d have much more heartburn if the sz2 BB disappeared than I would if the bomber was gone in the early game.  Neither are absolute game killers, but in terms of replaceability and impact:

• the UK can ill-afford the 24 ipcs to replace it and will probably buy a carrier instead just for affordability.  This requires at least one plane to be stationed on it, and does not have the same offensive power, but it’s probably all england can afford.

• losing that BB will SIGNIFICANTLY slow the UK’s arrival in Europe both because of the lack of protection to advance the trns and the likely need to reduce/delay ground unit and trn purchases until some capital ships are purchased (or she waits even longer for uncle sam to provide the cover).  This means there will be many more german units on the ground when she finally does arrive, probably at Russia’s expense.

• losing the ability to bombard means a few extra units defending because they weren’t killed along the way, plus losing the THREAT of using the bombard means germany can probably defend a little lighter across all it’s threatened coastal territories, moving more units to the front.

@ncscswitch:

The longer the battle, the MORE important high punch units are.  In a short battle, those high dollar, high punch units have less overall impact (unless it is a single round battle where the high value unit is again worthwhile).

FIGs on defense in particular, when protected by hordes of INF, will kill about 3 enemy units every 4 rounds of battle.  So once you hit Round 4 or 5, the FIG is paid for :-)

[devil’s advocate :evil:]
  But wouldn’t two tanks have likely killed 4 infs instead of 3 for the same 10 ipc in the same 4 round battle?  And allow you to absorb 2 hits return fire instead of 1?
[/devil’s advocate :evil:]

Regarding ratios, I think an important distinction is the difference between the ratio of purchases and the ratio of troops in a key/decisive battle.  If you’re shedding inf while trading or while you are advancing your stack, you need to buy a lot more than 3:1 infs to tanks in order to have that ratio once you hit your ultimate target.

@Cobert:

Grey chip.

As an abstract piece, it could represent anything you slide it under!

I say a red chip, 'cuz it’s 5 times more strongerer.

Put a red chip under dezrtfish, and watch out!  Chuck Norris and Jack Bauer together wouldn’t stand a chance.

@Cmdr:

No one can tell you what would be valuable 6 rounds into the game because the game is completely different at that point anyway.  If Moscow has fallen, those Russian fighters are probably pretty useless.

No, but I WILL tell you that I think sacrificing the Russian fighters at the expense of saving the UK bomber makes it more likely I will see Moscow fall by turn 6.  So I guess in that sense you’re right in a self-fullfilling-prophecy sort of way. ;)

@LT04:

How you ever lost Moscow and still ended up wining as the Allies?

It was pretty dicey (no pun intended) for a while but in this game the Axis conceded shortly after securing moscow:  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=11554
(Of course, it helped that Berlin had fallen just before Moscow)

@ncscswitch:

With a TRN build, you do NOT split your Germany forces.  You make the biggest stack in Egypt that you can, and THEN move out.

Just to be clear, I wasn’t saying I would recommend splitting the german landing forces, just that if you did it (as someone suggested), you wouldn’t necessarily be completely outmatched in egypt on G1.

@ncscswitch:

Amon Sul plays that way.  You may want to check out several of his games and see how it has worked for him (he kicked my a** with it several times this season).

Gargantua is another who tends to build the IC in Brazil.

I actually like The brazil IC as a counter to a strong German move into africa. The US then is probably best off moving up to the middle east to feed caucasus before japan gets entrenched in the south, or you can split your US forces sending just enough to control africa and the rest doing the shuck-shuck up to northern europe.  Maybe I’m being closed-minded, but I do not see as much value in a UK IC in Egypt.  The uk is usually best served trying to dump into northern europe and I don’t think it helps to split her forces north and south.  In either case, keep in mind that Japan can usually trade the middle east very cost-effectively with its battleships and can often hit the middle east/egypt very hard with navy, air and armor so it can take a LOT of resources to consistently defend egypt.

I pity the fool that doesn’t build any tanks.

R1 Ukraine with only 1 arm?  That is more likely than not going to fail to even take the territory/kill the G fig without losing russia’s planes.  Was that a typo?  Or have I been missing something all this time.

@hyogoetophile:

@Corbeau:

I do like that Japan transport bid idea too but myself would prolly place it in range of India/Australia for a J1 take.

I was confusing Jen’s transport bid with a Med transport bid, which I’m rapidly becoming a fan of. I never thought of landing in both AE and TJ, but (and I’m going off Low Luck odds here) how do you take both? TJ is very takeable, but 1inf 1arm 1ftr 1bmb vs 1inf 1arm 1ftr? Even a UK1 counter of 2inf 1ftr could likely retake AE.

With the med transport bid, you’ve got 2 boats.  I assume one trn lands in egypt giving 2 inf, 2 arm, fig, bomb, while the other lands in Trj with inf, rt vs. inf.

On average you’ll take egy w/ the 2 tanks remaining, and you’ve got about a 50/50 shot at having both unit survive in trj.  If both tanks are there, and UK can only bring 2 infantry, their odds of retaking EGY are not great unless they bring the bomber in as well, which means they can’t use it up north for a couple turns.

The best way to take advantage of the bid is to put troops directly on the front for key early battles to change advantage for several turns.  Since germany has more of these (particularly land battles since bids don’t buy you much navy), they typically get most of the bid.  In a typical KGF game, germany is under more pressure so they often need the boost more than japan.

The most common is a bid in africa to facilitate taking egypt, holding off a Uk1 retake, and allow a tank blitz through africa.  This has the potential to swing the economics by many ipcs (+ for germany and - for UK) for several turns. It can also allow the germans to send the med fleet west (Threatening fleet unification or a UK landing), taking egypt without transporting troops from italy. Probably the next-most-common is where people place bids on the eastern front - usually ukraine - to preserve another fig for germany (allowing them to pressure allied shipping and trade more efficiently) and to put added pressure on the unit-poor russians fairly quickly.  This can help germany take and hold ukraine for several turns and sometimes allows an all-out offensive to be launched toward moscow if russia gets bad dice on R1.  Transport bids in the med or baltic can put pressure on the allies in areas they don’t usually see it (Caucasus, London).  I’ve heard people mention a sub bid in the atlantic to hit the UK fleet on G1, but frankly I’ve never seen anyone try it.

The only place japan tends to get land units is to push the uk out of india quickly.  (e.g., FIC)  But Japan doesn’t tend to do a lot of early heavy fighting.  Half the time the allies turn and run anyway, so germany tends to benefit more from the bid.  Sometimes japan gets a transport bid added to the e.indies or caroline fleet to hit india, australia or hawaii harder earlier

@General:

Attacked my submarines with the battleship and transport thought right?

No, what Jen is saying is that if you’re trying to land troops in a friendly territory, you can attack the subs with just the planes during combat move.  They will either be sunk or submerge, clearing the sea zone for the remainder of the turn, thus making it safe for a landing.  Then you can bring your trns and bb into the sea zone for a landing in the friendly territory during NON-combat moves.

@captainjack:

@Crazy:

:roll:
On G1, it has to be Karilia and the Ukraine.
If the Ukraine was not attacked, or survived the R1 turn, and it is possible to throw enough units to have a shot at taking the Caucuses, then I would seriously consider doing it.
First of all, If the Caucuses are lost to the Russians on G1 then even when they get it back on R2, and the should, it will not be a place for them to build units in for that turn.  I thought that when you regain control of an IC that you owned at the beginning of the game you could produce immediately??? Secondly, every turn that the Russians spend retaking their original territories back, is a turn further away from German held territories. Whgich means more income for germany. Sure the losses will be high, but I’m building mostly infantry anyway, and most likely more than the russians and UK combined.

Nope.  You must hold an IC at the beginning of your turn in order to build units there so you can not recapture an IC and build there in the same turn.  However, if an ally recaptures it for you, then you can build there because it’s yours at the start of your turn.

@Romulus:

There is one point to remember: you have to land your units in the combat move, prior to go to the battle phase, in order to create and amphiboius landing.

One more thing, and perhaps this is obvious but, if any of the transports do not survive the sea battle to clear the landing zone, you must remove the units that came on those sunk transports from the land battle/amphibious assault as those men never made it safely to shore.

Yeah, I know what you mean. You know, the other day, I took one o’ them, uh–?
Meat thermometers?
Yeah! And I just shoved it into my ear, you know? As far as it could go, you know? But then I took one o’ them, uh–?
Ball-peen hammers?
Right. And just whacked it a few times right in there, you know.
Boy, that must smart.
I know! I HATE when THAT happens.

It seems to be doing much better.  Thanks!  (FWIW, I’m on Firefox 2.somthing.  I don’t use the _I_ncredibly Evil browser unless i absolutely have to.)

@Imperious:

The OOB AA gun rules ruin the game, they should not get hit 1 out of 6… Thats ridiculous since you basically never have more than 1-3 bombers. Id either reduce them in cost, or reduce the AA

Yeah, but the OOB rules also have economy-crushing Heavy Bombers and no territory turn limits, so bomber strategies exist.

It seems an exception would be if that big fat german stack has enough tanks to open a can o’ whoopass* on your retreating forces (and you’re not in position to return the favor on the remaining tanks) or if they can blitz through the territory to attack a location of strategic importance.

• “World’s toughest job? How about being the guy who has to put the whoop-ass into the can?” - Brad Simanek

@U-505:

Nice job, Tim. I suppose when you’re walking around with a can opener, everything looks like a can of worms to you, doesn’t it?

Well, I can’t say it was what I set out to do, but it’s been interesting to say the least.

Plus, I’ve got stock in holiday inn express.