Posts made by weddingsinger

Today I decided to try a VERY aggressive J1 attack (and aggressively play the Axis in general, for instance, Germany used its bombers on London instead of SZ 110/111 and everything succeeded anyway) so, along with most of the moves you’re used to, I attacked the Hawaiian fleet, too, and went for ANZAC’s destroyer/transport (50/50 shot!).  It went OK, maybe well, only more time will tell (we’re starting J2 on Monday)

Result was all the usual Japan attacks succeeding, making 40 ipc at the end of its turn (no national objectives), UK-Pacific is making 10 ipc after losing Hong Kong and Borneo, and, after its counter attack, the U.S. has zero planes and its only ships are the ones it bought on US1 and its transport in the Atlantic.

I’m not so sure about taking the 50/50 shot at ANZAC’s destroyer/transport instead of sending it to Hawaii.  I missed and was sank, but more importantly think the extra hit to take on the U.S.’ counter attack on Hawaii would be more worthwhile.  The U.S. lost everything on its counter (including his bomber and fighter from Central and East) but that was bad luck and should have been more successful.  Japan has a wounded battleship left.  Interestingly, I couldn’t take hits on my carrier’s lightly because if I did, my opponent would have retreated and I would lose my planes anyway.

Purchase: 2 transports, 1 minor industrial complex for Kiangsu
J2 plan is to take Malaya, hit China, send new transports south, buy tanks and a bomber(s), and J3 gets me the money islands and a factory on Malaya, buy more tanks and some fleet(?), J4 is Calcutta and buy fleet cause the U.S. is showing up.

Sea attacks:
SZ 37 (UK battleship) cruiser and two bombers
SZ 35 (Phillipines) carrier from Caroline Islands, and SZ19’s battleship, sub, and destroyer
SZ 62 (ANZAC) 1 destroyer from Caroline Islands
SZ 26 (Hawaii) all of SZ 6’s non-transport fleet

Land:
Borneo (1 inf)
Phillipines (2 inf, 2 art, 1 fighter)
Hong Kong (2 inf, 1 art, planes)
French Indo-China (2 inf)
Yunnan (2 inf, 1 art, planes)
Hunan (2 inf, planes)
Anhwe
Chahar

Thank you, guys.  That is what we thought but its our first time in this scenario and wanted to be sure.

Scenario: Germany has attacked strict neutrals, but its only round 2 and Russia is NOT at war with Germany/Italy.

So, can Russia take these now pro-Ally neutrals now?  Or does it have to wait for round 4 or a German DOW?

@taamvan:

Your plan?  Yes, dave goes through Turkey to slay the middle east, from time to time.   The most direct path avoids this and just pours units into Russia but UK has a bastion in the ME with some relief and that’s what your cool plan was trying to lance

I don’t get the Turkey thing… doesn’t that turn all the neutrals against you and cause more trouble than its worth?

Of you’re wondering the context, I had a game where Russia left his stack of infantry in Amur, so J1 I switched to a ‘kill Russia first’ and a major in Manchuria would make sense.

In normal play, I’m often  J3 DOW guy and fond of two minors on J1, to get moving, and have the southern factory do inf or art, and Manchuria do tanks.  Handy for India or China.

So… Is the official rule ‘No’?  The book says original territories, so I’m inclined to say it’s allowed…

Ok, so G1 that doesn’t work, but Italy could use it’s bomber to hit an airfield so that on Germany’s turn they couldn’t scramble… Got it.

Am I reading the rules correctly that, if Germany bombed London’s airfield as part of G1 attacks, and scored a 3 or higher, U.K. could NOT scramble any fighters out of London?

Seems like an easy choice to make, since it would also force U.K. to pay to fix before doing Taranto.

Can Japan build a major industrial complex in Manchuria (or Kiangsu)?

and, following that, should they?  I know there’s a risk of the complex being destroyed if the territory is taken over, but, I really like being able to crank out mech and tanks for Japan on the mainland.  Manchuria already has easy access to plenty of defensive infantry and even AA.

Or perhaps you think having two minors, one each in Manchuria and Kiangsu gives you options, and both feed the same seazone, if you need navy there…

Thanks, PainState, I thought that was how it went but wanted to make sure bringing in more assets was legit.

If Germany has subs convoying England, and England buys a destroyer on its turn, Germany still gets to roll, seems to be how the rules read (just making sure).

My main question is, on Germany’s turn, can it bring more units into the seazone to keep the subs there rather than retreating from the zone?  Bombers from Western Germany, for instance?

The way it read it seemed a normal ‘combat phase’ move.  Italy even scrambled its fighters to support the destroyer trying to stop British subs on its coast.  Correct?

I played this way this morning and here is some of how it played out:

G1 buy was a bomber and two subs, holding 6 for the next round.  
Attacks were typical G1 except:
hitting Southern Europe instead of Normandy (need the factory on the Med for G2)
two subs hit the British cruiser in seazone 91 (to help Italian fleet)
1 sub to 106 (can only reach 106 or 109, and 109 can scramble 1-4 fighters)
German fighter lands in Italy for Taranto defense.

Unfortunately, the north sea attack in SZ111 went unbelievably poorly and his battleship escaped (these were the only planes I lost, btw.  He scrambled Scotland into 111 and the French fighter to the channel), otherwise Britain would have lost everything in the Med and Atlantic except for its two destroyers and two transports on Round 1.

J1 was a very successful all out attack on 12 Russian troops in Amur, and usual China attacks.

Italy’s destroyer/transport in SZ 96 survived because Britain only had one fighter to attack it (no Brit cruiser thanks to two subs), and Italy’s fleet attacked the French in SZ 93, joining the German carrier/fighter that is about to be built.  Sank the Brit Cruiser left over from Taranto.  OR, not having the British cruiser over Malta means Italy could attack the British planes on Malta, but you end up losing your fleet, like usual.

–—

G2 ($68 avail) Buy Carrier, Transport, sub (I now wish it had been two transports) for Southern Europe; bombers for Germany
G takes Normandy and original transport takes Gibraltor (british bomber on Malta can hit it, but would then be destroyed in N. Africa)

J2 returns to typical pattern for China, Calcutta, money islands, but Amur force starts rolling up Eastern Russia ($5 easy)

I2 ($17 avail) Greece, Morocco, Algeria, etc, as able
2nd transport took Trans-Jordan to seal the canal from British ships
Italy now gets $10-15 in bonuses (no enemy ships, holds 3 out of 4 Greece/Gibraltor/Morrocco; and all of Northern Africa)

Resulting situation:
Germans were now convoying England, max bombed its factory, and had bombers ready to hit both minor Russian factories on G4.  
Italy is very relevant, and supported by a modest German fleet.  Italy easily took Cairo I3 (I actually sent all the German fighters down, too, to keep it) and has a factory in Iraq, threatening Africa, Calcutta, and/or Southern Russia.

J4 will include bombers hitting Moscow from China though destroying the Russians on J1 did slow down taking the money islands and the Phillipines, though the income will even out with the additional Russian income.

The biggest bonus is how much this affected the Russians, who lost income and are threatened on 3 fronts by all 3 Axis, and U.S. being forced to help Britain.

update: this game played out as a dominating win for the Axis.  By turn 5 and 6, Japan was at 80 ipc (base), Germany was in 51 (base), and Italy was 24 with all N.O.s (so about 40ipc total).  When the Allies surrendered, All 3 Axis had a Russian minor factory and were about to attack Moscow.  India was alive but neutered.  Same with London.

What do you think of

G1 buy: 1 bomber, 1-3 subs (or 1 sub, 1 destroyer, etc)…
Take Southern Europe over Normandy
Two subs go after the British Cruiser in 91 (so it can’t be used against Italy even though this weakens the German attack on the Channel)

The goal is for 3-4 German subs to convoy England, maybe send one to Canada.  Even if you’re not going to Sea Lion, you can take 6-8 a turn and bomb London.  If he doesn’t fix it, I use 2 bombers on Russian factories G4.

G2 buy includes a carrier, destroyer or sub, and a transport for Southern Europe, where Italy parked its fleet at the end of its turn, taking out the French navy
Italy then has its transport(s) to take Gibraltor and/or Morroco on I2.    And Germany’s ships can be back in England on G4, or stay and help in the Med.  Or, hell, if the U.S. is careless, use Gibraltor’s naval base to convoy or attack the U.S. (That may involve assets from the North Sea.  Never hold it, but you get their money and turn a major into a minor)

@Leatherneckinlv:

Italy:
Turn 1 APA (10 ipc)
Turn 2 AB and all SS (from 18 to 28 ipc)
Turn 3 AB and  all SS (33 plus IPC
turn 4 all SS (35 plus ipc)

May I ask how you get Italy to that much money that quickly?  I’m used to 16-18 ipc at the end of round 1, if Germany strafes Yugoslavia and leaves Southern France.  Britain always cleans up one of the Italian armies in Africa when I play (usually Ethiopia, if he’s being conservative), round 2 would be not much more, maybe 2 for Greece, 1-2 more in Africa, and probably lose 1 or even 2 there)

I’m 100% on board with that idea. J3 and G4 means no Russia NO’s until round 4, and if not Sea Lion, at least strangle U.K. as much as possible… convoy them for $10 a turn (England/Scotland), bomb the factory in London until they stop using it…I think it also means if the U.S. puts an emphasis on Europe, Japan can take great advantage.

J3 seems best to me.  Plenty of time to get the transports/factories/etc for the big push onto the money islands, Honk Kong, etc. all at once, and the U.S. has been stuck with minor factories and $50-$60 less so far, ANZAC is down $10 or more.

For Germany, If I’m squeezing Britain, I prefer laying off Russia until R4 so they miss out on $40-$80 and, hopefully, I’ve taken U.K.'s entire $28 economy out of the game, and Italy can start to expand much more easily and be relevant in Africa and the ME.

@Kreuzfeld:

In general, I agree that we should look at what use you get out of a unit, for what cost. Where a unit can operate and what it can threathen is a very important concideration that should not be missed. When I build my army, I try to combine the maximizing raw fighting power i need with the appropriate ability to project that power.
Your calculation does not take hits into account, a few months ago there was a much better thread with calculations by myself and others where we show that the fightingpower of a stack was about ((#number hitpoints)^2)*(Average strength) . This formula is fairly easy to prove mathematically.  From what i can see, this formula is better than yours.

Other than that I agree that the following units are weak: Tac, Tank, Cruiser, BB. Most other units have purposes that are valuable in the right amount.

Yeah, it glosses over some things, for sure.  Subs increase in value if you can use them for convoy strikes, for instance.  Tacticals’ value is in how it improves other units, or striking naval/air bases.

Tanks are about finding the balance between needed speed and/or having enough infantry to not lose any tanks.  The example Vann used was spending 300 ipcs and attacking a stack of infantry and showed the 300 ipcs of infantry was a better buy than tanks.  Except it ignored mixing infantry (17% chance of hit but can afford twice as many) and tanks (50% hit rate + more mobile) as the most efficient use (well, actually infantry/artillery and tanks).

@ShadowHAwk:

@Caesar:

Problem I had with J1 DOW is that do you ignore jacking loose USSR territories or do you just focus on China, Dutch, and UK territories? The problem I had with J1 is that if you do not take 10 dollars on the first turn, what was the point of it instead of riding US trade?

You should take 10 ipcs turn 1, but your taking them from the allies ( except france ). You take 7 from UK-Pac and 2 from US. thats a 18 ipc swing right there.

Wouldn’t it be a -12 swing since the U.S. will get +30 for entering the war?  Or +25 or whatever, since Japan probably takes the Philippines

@Dauvio:

Take the tank for instance. C/M/A/D �6/2/3/3. Instead of buying a tank, buy two infantry. The two infantry has more offensive then the tank does. If you take the PUNCH DRUNK FORMULAS, it said’s the tank is more powerful then the two infantry which is total nonsense. Take 300 IPC, and buy 100 infantry, and those 100 infantry attack 50 infantry. Then take another 300 IPC, and buy 50 tanks, have them attack 50 infantry. As you can see the 100 infantry is stronger then the 50 tanks. And that makes the tank a obsolete unit to buy.

USE THE A&A dot org CALCULATOR TO SEE THE RESULTS.

100 inf vs 50 inf you’ll end with 80-85 inf ($246) left.

50 tanks vs 50 inf you’ll end with 35-38 tanks ($200) left

Except you don’t attack with 50 tanks.  The actual best benefit is however many infantry you need to not lose a single tank, which hit 3 times more often at half the cost and can move two.

For pure value, the $7 inf/art combo gets you slightly better hits and a lot more Cannon fodder, if mobility doesn’t matter.

So wouldn’t the value for Germany advancing on Russia be, say, two buys of information/art followed by tanks that can then reach the front line?