Posts made by Whackamatt

Done.

So for my edification:  can Triple A auto post the moves, etc straight to this thread, or do I have to copy/paste it in here?

Also, are the battle results sent to both emails as well?

No scramble

God I’m such a newb.  NVM.  I see it in the forum posts now.  lol.

I didn’t see the file.  Whackamatt@yahoo.com.  Either way.  No scramblies.

No scramble.

Or do you email me the file once your Turn is complete?

So do I have to reproduce these moves in my Triple A?  Then you forum the dice, and I have to edit the results?  Seems very complicated.

Never played on the forums.  Do I have to replicate my opponents moves in Triple A after they’ve already done them?  Seems very prone to errors.  Is there a file I download to my Triple A, then?

This seems to imply you didn’t do a full-strength attack in SZ97.

 Not the case.  The planes I refer to start in Great Britain, so they can’t participate in a SZ97 assault regardless.  The only question is if you use the starting Gibraltar fighter or not. Â

If Germany went with the 2 TT buy then they can dump a serious force in Gibraltar if you didn’t block it, which sacrifices your fighters for nothing.

I’m not seeing the big negative.  I didn’t give all the details, so the airbase Gibraltar move usually involves at least one transport landing in Gibraltar (either the 1TT from Canada, or if one survived in SZ109)  So it would be 2TT vs. 1 TT + 4 FTR.   I’ll take those odds. Â

Plus, those TTs are now not sending an extra 4 units into Russia every turn.
And if German needs to bring planes if at all possible, those planes aren’t attacking the UK fleet in the Med.

I think it’s actually better to land in the French sub-Saharan territories since you can still get to Egypt in 1 more move.  The downside being you can’t get back to London if Germany suddenly does something to change your mind.

Which is why I wouldn’t land there.  Moving them out with no way to return can open up Sealion.  It’s all conditional, of course.

I read about this in posts that were very old, it seems to have fallen out of favor to attacks in Ethiopia or holing up in Egypt. Â

It probably was more favorable in OOB setup and turn order, as well.  As it stands now, I’ll have to investigate.  
The main focus is on protecting Egypt.  If you attack Tobruk, many of your land units will be too far to double back.  If you attack Tobruk UK1, then you’d probably need Ftr support, which would lessen any SZ97 attack.  I’m not sure it’s worth eliminating land units for land units when Italy can reinforce with transports.
I’d say it could work, but it’s very conditional on what your plan is, how you deal with the Italian navy, and where Germany lands its planes.

50% crafting, maybe.  I agree that this won’t happen until J6/7 depending on what the Allies do.  I don’t agree that it is quite so easy to just block Japan with no consequence.  It is difficult to predict what is happening in the Indian Ocean at that stage of the game.  Strategically though the Allies cannot tell the difference between an India-crush and a potential Egypt-crush. Â

I disagree.  You CAN tell.  You get suspicious when Japan isn’t setting up to take the DEI in one fell swoop.  They’re not positioning anything for an after-attack on ANZAC.
Even if you couldn’t, the starting India fleet usually withdraws towards Africa (my experience).  And if Japan doesn’t attack J3, UK can declare war and have blockers lined up. Â

I would expect that India has already lost its blockers trying to prevent the J3/J4 attack on Calcutta. Â

Not me.  Perhaps it’s a style difference.  I know that there is 100% NOTHING India can do to stop Japan from taking it.  The key is to make it as costly as possible.  Japan needs those 3TT purchased Round 1 to take India.  Plus they can declare war on Japan to free Yunnan, the usual landing spot for its airforce that attacks India, moving from an airbase and landing in Yunnan.  Deny them a landing spot, and they can’t bring their entire airforce.
I reserve the starting Indian fleet and bring it to Africa.  Then they get offensive if Japan ISN’T crushing India, say an economic grab of the DEI.  I keep one near the West Indies to sail east as a blocker if needed, (meaning Japan has an AB and they can attack with everything).

If London buys blocker DDs for South Africa, then you’re not buying the 2x Mech Inf that need to be trickling up north to save Egypt from Italy.  I’m sure India won’t buy any replacement blockers because their income is about to drop dramatically and they need to avoid losing Calcutta.

They start out with one in South Africa.  Combine with 1DD 1CC 1BB from India, and it’s a lot of blockers.  Neither London nor India need to buy any.

Also, I don’t see how you can reasonably expect the Allies to be able to block everything an Indian Ocean Japanese fleet can threaten. Â

I never said they could.  However, must of what Japan can hit, and more importantly WHEN they get there, make the point moot.  I don’t care if they take Peria if the Germany into Russia assault runs dry, or Italy still doesn’t have Egypt.  They can attack Peria all they like.

You can go back and hit Calcutta,

Not really.  India is buying nothing but Inf.  The amount of land units and air Japan can bring is finite.  If Japan sails past India, then doubles back, that’s another turn for India to buy more fodder, pushing the chance of winning statistically out of reach.
ANZAC is going on the offensive as most of the Japanese navy is out of the theatre, and possibly Russia or the US are moving in.

land in Persia and possibly drop an IC there, go down to force the UK to defend South Africa, or move on to Egypt. Â

By now we’re talking Round 6-7.  Egypt could still be in UK hands with a factory and 7+ Ftrs on it.  Whatever Japan gets there either won’t be enough, or is no longer needed.

If the US is countering with full-on Atlantic buys, then this move is very safe for Japan

Safe in terms of pressure from the US.  I’m not a fan of all-in buys in one theatre over another, so that would never happen with me.  Plus they wouldn’t need the US’s help.  India is helping China, and ANZAC is taking some of the DEI back.
It’s very tough for Japan to take all the DEI and hold them, fend off a slowly building US force, and clear out all of China after handicapping yourself by removing 6 planes, 3 CVs, and 6TTs worth of stuff out of the theatre. Â

and you will still be matching US income after taking the DEI.

And THIS is where the strategy falls apart.  I don’t see how Japan can take the DEI without weakening its initial fleet, meaning less going towards Egypt.  If you buy more TTs and Inf after Round 1, then it’s not as many land units being placed with factories in China.  How much protection do you have against ANZAC which can buy a DD a turn and starts with 3 Ftrs?  What if Russia had 18Inf squatting in Korea?  What if the US had been spending a scant 16 ICs a turn in the pacific?

Lots of advice for Allied players goes for a full London buy round 1 and round 2.

I whole-heartedly disagree with that advice.  Round 1, Yes.  But not a mandatory Round 2 buy.  If Germany does NOT buy naval units Rd2, then they CANNOT make Sealion a success.  They statistically cannot bring enough to London otherwise.  I suppose a caveat would be to watch for them “saving” money for a surprise TT buy, but that’s easy enough to watch for.

I disagree that Italian income doesn’t rise as quickly as Japan’s.  It is not hard to get Italy up to 20 with 1 NO + French & Balkan territory on round 2. Â

We may be discussing two different concepts.  It’s dependent on when Japan attacks.  So if Italy attacks with German support while Japan waits to hold the US off, then yes, Italy can gain more than Japan who is doing nothing but pushing into China.
However, on J1, Japan can get +15 ICs from territory.  If they wait and do a J3 money grab, they’ll get +27ICs not counting a few from China.  
My point was, once Japan pulls the trigger, Italian income will never increase at the same rate.  I have yet to see a turn where Italy gained +27ICs in one Round.  It happens fairly regularly for Japan.
I have been on the winning side where the Italian economy was bigger than Germany’s.  Sealion was a success, and the Allies became confused thereafter.  Italy ran free and I won the game as Japan through VCs.  Italy should never be ignored, for sure.

Very easy to get by taking Gibraltar or Egypt (pushing through to Morocco is also easy but slower).  Germany doesn’t need to place anything there, that is part of my point. Â

Does this go back to Germany taking Gibraltar?  I rarely see that.  Italy starts with 1TT a lot of times, and they gain NOs for taking Greece, or just plain getting land units is more important than stopping non-existent Allied ships from moving into the Med.

Just do the small trickling of naval buys you might have done anyway to annoy the UK in the Atlantic. Â

I would actually welcome such buys as the UK, is you don’t go Sealion, that’s less land units against Russia.

I’ll agree that it can take a while for Italy to exceed UK’s income, but it does not take that long to get close enough as to make no difference.

I agree there.  If you ignore Italy, it’s to the Allies’ peril. Â

I think this relies on too many assumptions: Â

Doesn’t everything in an Axis & Allies forum?  LOL.  That’s why I love this game.  Nothing Past G1 is guaranteed.

So many things can have happened in the Med I don’t think you can argue that the US can be guaranteed to take Rome, especially in a situation where Italy felt safe enough to do heavy Infantry buys I4 & I5.  It’s all speculation that relies on what exactly happened in Egypt.

I agree.  I did not mean to say it was guaranteed, only that some forum posts make it sound impossible.  I think it could happen either way depending on strategies involved and sometimes dice.
Ultimately, I wanted it stated as something to plan against.  All too often in the forums I see speculation about a strategy that ends up with guaranteed victory.  Some people seem to discount all of the other turns that go between them from one round to the next.
I have seen Rome get crushed, and I’ve seen games where the US could do nothing about victory, even though they’d spent everything in the Atlantic.

I would love to be convinced otherwise.

Then game on!  :o)  I hope you’re not right either.  Care for some Triple A games by email?  (Sadly all I have time for, but I can guarantee several turns a day). Â

I disagree that this forfeits an Axis victory.  The opportunity cost for the Axis is much less to seize Egypt at any price than it is for the Allies to hold it at any price.

I didn’t say it forfeits an Axis victory.  I believe it could.  If German has to throw away it’s airforce to take Egypt, then there’s nothing to stop the US fleet.  The key would be in timing of said “throwing away”.

I’m looking for as many games as people want to start.  Tech, Dice, No bid. IM me and we’ll be under way.  I can guarantee I’ll finish the game, and get in 1-2 turns a day.

May the war be with you.

:-D

Whackamatt@yahoo.com

I’m down with a game.  IM away!

I’m interested in Global 40 PBEM.  If either of you are up for more than one game at a time, feel free to send a turn my way.

Whackamatt@yahoo.com

I do agree that if the Axis spend enough resources, they can take Egypt.  Without question.  However, I think the Allies can make them pay for it in such away that victory is now removed from their grasp.  It can be retaken and liberated shortly thereafter.  In some games the UK has nothing to do but buy Ftrs and Tanks in South Africa every turn.  Italy can’t counter that spending for a long time.

Statistically, buying all Inf gets you the most defensive firepower for your dollar.  It does lock you into a turtle stance and leaves you unable to react and counter-attack much, but it’s the best defense if you know where they’re going, and they always go for Russia.  (They have to get 2 VC from Russia even after a successful Sealion).
Also, I’m not sure how it’s that easy for Italy to take Egypt.  They can do it, no doubt, but it’s the holding it that I find difficult vs. a good UK player.
After the obligatory Rd1 buy of all Inf, the UK player should move units up from South Africa and fly planes into the Med via Gibraltar.  Egypt can tighten up pretty fast if Italy doesn’t take it Rd 2.  When does Egypt usually fall in your games?
Once it’s clear that German isn’t going for the UK on G2, the UK player can fly 3 Ftr to Gib, and place an Airbase there.  On Rd3, 3 Brit Ftrs and 1 French Ftr can land in Egypt.

A Japanese player willing to hurt their position on the Pacific board can also send over Carriers + Air to also pick up where Germany leaves off if necessary.  It doesn’t matter how badly the Pacific goes if you guaranteed the win on the Europe board.

Is this just theory crafting?  Have you ever TRIED this?  India can use blocking ships to delay any Japanese fleet from reaching Egypt until at least Rd 7.  Combine with DD blockers placed in South Africa if needed.
Plus, if Japan gives away that they’re not even trying for a Pacific victory, 90% of US spending can be spent in the Atlantic.  Combine that with German plane losses clearing out a Med navy, and landing planes in Africa, and the US needs even less protection for its transports.

Also, I have never seen the Allies attack Tobruk.

Scenario 2, Turtle: UK focuses on the Tobruk attack and skips SZ97.  In this case Italy skips the French fleet (if present) and slaughters the UK on its own.  In this scenario Italy gets its full income in the first round and possibly the NO for no Allied ships right away.  The German air force still goes down to Africa to clean out whatever pocket of troops the UK might have built up.

If Germany throws its airforce away clearing out land units in Africa, then the US can sail in pretty much unprotested.  And you’re also incorrect.  If Italy skips the French fleet as you say, then they would NOT get their no Allied ships NO.
In your German opener, do they destroy all of the UK navy?

• Spend everything in the Med.  The Axis can just send more so you’ll lose, but this at least drags the process out a bit.  Expect Cairo to be lost the same time Moscow falls, if not earlier.

I disagree.  What do you mean the Axis can spend more in the Med?  It starts out 28 vs 10, with no way for Germany to place units there.  Plus anything Germany manages to place there isn’t going after Russia.

• Spend everything in the Atlantic.  Italy expands rapidly and outproduces UK-Europe.

Italy can grow to be a monster, yes, but it doesn’t happen “rapidly”.  Nothing does in this game.  Only Japan can see great increases due to the large IC values of the DEI and NOs.  Italy will not outproduce the UK for a good 5 turns, which isn’t rapid at all.

• Have the US go all-out Europe.  Japan counters by not attacking the Western Allies, which is detrimental to Japan’s long-term interests, but since you win in Europe, it’s irrelevant.  There is nothing the US can buy that will allow them to get Paris, Rome, or Cairo by the time the game ends in round 6 or 7.

I disagree.  The US, going all Europe, can have an airforce that clears the way Rd 5 in the Med for a Rd 6 sacking of Rome.  Especially with strategies as stated above that Germany has thrown it’s airforce away so Italy can take Egypt.
It then goes into the back and forth of, If German rebuilds its airforce, then that’s less land units vs. Russia, and Russia doesn’t fall Rd 6.
The key for the US is to only buy as much protection as necessary, consolidate and strike once.

In sum, it seems your stated premice is that the Axis will win, and there’s nothing the Allies can do about it.  I disagree.

Actually, I don’t know that you would be pushed off for certain.  In Rd2, Germany may move units east, or huddle them in France.  Italy usually gets Southern France.  I don’t know that Germany would be in much of a position to push you back with too much beyond planes.

I like working out all of the strategic options, so let’s take a serious look at this strategy.  Thank you for putting forth your idea.

Rnd 1:

DISADVANTAGES:

1. You’ll be pushed right back off the coast Rd 2.  The minor factory by Rd3 will NOT happen.  Germany starts with 12 planes, and there will already be a lot of units in France.  Tanks & Mechs from there, backed by Holland/Western Germany landed planes will annihilate whatever you put there.
2. You gave Germany 6 Inf in Sweden Rd 3.  While it is extra men, however those extra guys can’t reach Novogorod until Round 6.  Still a disadvantage, but not too bad.
3. As you yourself stated, Japan will go crazy with no US presence.  Do you really think you’ll knock out Germany in time to double back against Japan?  By Rd3 they could have all the DEI, the Philippines, and most of China, collecting 60+.  Possibly even Hawaii if you move everything away from Japan.  Then they’ve opened up a second front against you by threatening Western USA.
4. What do you do if Japan DOESN’T attack Rd 2.  Say they’re waiting till J3 or just don’t attack the US?

ADVANTAGES:

1. A second front has been opened up for Germany.  This means Germany is moving all of it’s planes West, and even more land units are moving away from Russia.  It may even make the Germans deploy more to the West, as the US has created the second front extra early.
2. You will have a follow-on assault every Rd of 52 initially, then 72ish after that.
3. Your TTs will survive because of the size of your starting combined fleet plus what you buy.  Using the Gibraltar NB, your TTs will make it back to the coast Rd3, negating the need to buy TTs beyond a few rounds.  This translates into extra protection, possibly more planes for carriers that go on to Eypt, more offshore shots, or more money spent in the Pacific.  It becomes VERY flexible.
4. What happens if Japan doesn’t attack Rd 2?  The US would build up even more forces and take Spain for certain.  By Rd 3 there would be little threat of a counter-assault, as there won’t be too many units left in France.

OVERALL:  I like the strategy.  It’s sound.  It provides some flexibility in what the USA can do.  I don’t think it will work quite in the way you think it would, and I don’t think the factory really gains you much as it’s just one round from the US anyway, and planes can land there as well in a turn.  Most of the negatives it induces can be planned for and countered, except maybe the Swedish infantry.  I’ll have to do some simulations in Triple A to see what the Axis could do about it and how bad it would really be.  I think it to be better than most believe.

Giving your opponent 8 inf isn’t enough to dissuade me from using it.  The best part is, it’s new.  If they don’t even consider it a possibility, they can be caught by surprise.

WHAT I’D CHANGE:  Forget the NB Rd 1 buy and minor factory Rd 3 buy.  The NB is only used to get the Hawaiian fleet there, yes?  Buy 2 TTs, 1 Carrier, 1 CC for the Atlantic.  It’s not about taking Spain to place that critical factory there, it’s about transporting as much from the USA as you can each turn.  Once you have the right amount of TT protection (to fend off a worst case Germany lost no planes Rd 1 of 5 Ftr 5 Tac 2 Strat).  THEN worry about filling all of those transports in successive turns.

If you buy a NB and all TTs, there’s a huge risk that Germany has enough planes to sink EVERYTHING that got there Rd 2.

The NB (assuming you’ve done Spain before, or you’re playing against a savy player), would give away your hand.  “Say, what would that get you?  Oh!  That Pacific fleet you moved in (signaling you’re going all-in on Germany early on) could then hit Spain or land in Gibraltar!”  Surprise them buy not buying it.  Plus it leaves a few more naval units already around Hawaii.  Also, if Japan does NOT attack Rd 2, it’s a wasted buy that will do nothing for the rest of the game.

Low luck is really just a test of the strategy, but not how it matches up to the real world.  The unpredictibility of the dice works both ways, and can lead to many unanticipated opportunities and disasters, keeping each game different.

It also depends on if you’re good at rolling dice.  It is an actual skill, and some people can just never throw a “1” to save their life or capital.

America can not take any neutrals when not at war.  Brazil early can’t happen.

In Europe, the US fleet can’t move, except one SZ east.  In the Pacific, they can be off the coast of any non-Japanese territory, but can’t land.  So you can have transports and navy next to Queensland, for example, but you can’t land units there (land or air) until you’re at war.