Posts made by Woodstock

I do believe it says so somewhere. Somewhere in the non-combat section, or the unit section. Not sure.

Maybe forgetting Africa all together and just gunning straight for Germany which now has less ground units and an inferior fleet (unless the allies screwed up).  The German fleet doesn’t have to be sunk, I can still land in France or funnel through Norway.

…

…with on both options placing your fleet in range of mine, thus making it a juicy target. Even if Ger loses it’s entire fleet then, it will set back the Allies back to square one.
Except, in this square one, they have less money, whereas Germany has more then the original first square.

You are better off directing the West to waste their transport drops, screwing around with them a little in Africa for example, you should relish moments when large Allied forces are in Africa with little Axis forces in Africa (Remember the Japs can have a little fun here too).  I would even say, if it sets them back for 2 turns and higher materiel costs, entice them into trading W Europe.  Depend more on the allies making these mistakes than a mistake with them getting their fleet sunk, as the Axis are going to still be building much more valuable ground or air units.

Kill Russia, worry about sending just enough to the West or Africa to keep you alive, those are your secondary theaters.  Every other piece of land you take, kill you make, or defensive bolstering you do should be seen as a “neccesary evil” for killing Russia.  If need be, you should even sacrifice Italy or maybe even W Europe (And if Japan has turned into a monster and is going to deliver the killing blow, even Germany itslef) if it means you can Kill Russia.  Because of this, I don’t see navy building as an optimal strat for the Western Axis (Japan works a bit different).

And funny you mention all this, because for some reason I manage to do it all (be a pain in Afrika etc), even with a Naval build.
And I do have Japan take Russia…but then without giving up Italy, West Europe, and most definitely Germany…
Maybe I just play sucky Allied players…

The only downside I would see is if JApan is heavily attacked from all sides, and all ways to Russia are efficiently locked up. Then I could indeed see a problem. However, that can only be achieved with heavy Russian and British investments, which can only help Germany.

@dondoolee:

I have a hard time understanding how the Axis could survive with people advocate building expensive fleets for both Germany AND Italy.

I have a bunch of old TripleA games on my hard drive that could make you help understand? ;-)

It seems some people are just obsessed with building fleets.  An airplane is more verstile and cost effective.  Not to mention buying fleets= money not beeing sent to kill Russia= literally, buying the Allies time.

I am not obsessed with buying fleets, I just really…really hate an empty Baltic sea. This gives the UK a whole lot of territories to land on.
And as I said before: Russia is for Japan. My goal with Germany is to survive untill Japan reaches Moscow. A lot more secure then the Race to Moscow with Germany vs Race to Berlin with Allies - kind of games.

A japanese player should never let the Indian fleet survive after J1.
Sending your aussie fleet West will be dead aswell (there should always be at least 2 fighters in range).

Taking the Aussie fleet East, and have them sail Soutf of America to SA will take 'em 3 turns, but you’ll be guaranteed to have them survive, and give a tiny boost to the British forces departing from SA.

But for the rest…yes, I am toying with this approach aswell. Have USA spend a lot of stuff in the Pacific, sparing just enough to have a decent shuck heading to Algeria.
The British IPC that you can’t spend in SA can be used in many ways (Scandinavia, threaten the Atlantik Wall, or Algeria aswell. Or juist build, build, build till turn 4 or so, and unleash hell on Germany at once)

@Upside-down_Turtle:

Yes, good idea, not going carrier.  My first AA50 game I bought a carrier. Worst A&A decission I’ve ever made.

Still, if feel the German fleet is just a pipe dream.  Yes, I played a game where Germany actually had more ships than US and UK in the Atlantic, but that was a heavy, KJF game. 
Hitler thought the Kaiser was stupid for building a fleet for several reasons:
1. It could be bottled up in the Baltic too easily. 
2. Just can’t compete w/ UK
3. Simply trying to compete w/ UK only got the UK pissed off, eventually leading to war.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with the Fuhrer on this one.  A German fleet is waste of IPCs.  It will eventually get destroyed, period.  And what strategic objective would you have achieved?  None, just blowing up a few UK/US ships, which you could have done with air.  So what if it ties up Allied fleets and take them down with you?  The Allies can afford to trade units with you.  By building a fleet, you play into the Allies’ hands, because it distracts you from Russia, and forces you to trade units you can’t afford to trade.  Your goal is Moscow. 
Let me repeat it.

Key to Axis Victory:Moscow!!!

Key to Axis Victory:Moscow!!!

True.
But whoever said that the Germans have to take Moscow? With each and every game I have won as the Axis, Moscow was taken by the Japanese.

Let me explain my rationale:

Almost everyone here plays the Race for Moscow with Germany vs Race for Berlin with USA/UK strategy.

What I try to achieve is break that habit, as that strategy has quite the odds to go wrong for the Axis.
Thus, I build a German navy. And here’s why.

Situation 1: Allies go full KGF.
Let them come. With Germany not focusing too much on Russia, that is one tough nut to crack. Especially if they have to deal with a decent German navy aswell.
Played well, the Allies are gonna be needing at least 6 turns before they can even pose a decent (and continous!) threat to the German shores. (Imagine what Germany can put in land, sea and air in 6 turns, and then count what the Allies can do in those 6 turns, with Japan snatching IPC’s from them everywhere).

By that 6th turn, Japan is knocking on Moscow’s doors.

Yeah, but you’re Baltic fleet will be blown to bits. So what’s the point?
Well…that is exactly the point. I’m building units to fight. And if anyone tries to attack the Baltic fleet, that fleet will defend, and take down quite some expensive units. Units, that at least UK, are unable to replace easily, setting the Allies back a couple of rounds.
By then, the fleet has served it’s purpose.

Situation 2: Allies see my Baltic built, and go KJF.
Great, I’ll go and play with UK. Good luck pulling off a KJF while UK is under heavy fire. Or I use the fleet to form a quick bridge to Karelia. Even better.

And Japan is making it’s way o Russia aswell I assume, so that should be another Axis win ;-)

@Emperor:

I like sending the 2 subs to SZ2 because they get the free shot.  I send 3 fighters against the fleet in SZ12 and Ground forces to Egypt.

In my current game this has worked out pretty well with a CV+DD purchase on G1 and a TP, DD, CA on G2, and added a 2nd BB for Italy on I2, the axis rule the seas, and Germany is entrenched in Karelia.  Those pesky allies have a huge bomber fleet which is worrisome, we’ll see how it works out.

I like your style MOllari. Finally someone openly admitting investing in the Baltic is worthwile :)
And let the Bombers come. If the board looks like anything I think it should look, that’s all the Allie can send in against your fleet.

However, Axis >>>>> Allies money wise, so even if they blow up your entire fleet, they will definitely lose some bombers aswell…but you are in the position to easily replenish the forces, whereas the Allies can’t.

@bugoo:

I hate to say it but I feel KGF is alive and well especially with NOs.  The reason is Russia.  In a proper KGF Russia should have an income of atleast 40 IPC if not more. (+5 for fin/nor / +15 NOs).  This allows Russia to survive against Japan for a good amount of time.  Whereas in a KJF game, Russia is usually reduced to around 20-25 IPCs, even less once you start landing UK/US figs in moscow to keep it alive, while germany is making 50-60+ and italy 10-20+.

Also, while on paper it looks easier to defend against KGF with Italy, that is just not true!  It is even more difficult esp with the value of France.  It is easy for the US to threaten Italy and retake africa / meeting the japs in egypt while the UK trades france or poland or wherever they want to be.  Then you can threaten to do a double drop on France to take and hold, or threaten Italy, or threaten germany forcing the germans to pull back from russia.  Add in some SBR for good measure and Europe is yours.  It just takes some skilled Russian play in pushing Germany back by T3-4.

On top of that, Japan makes more money than the US by the end of turn 3 no matter what you do and there is absolutely no way to defend southern asia or keep china in the game.  Well I suppose you could abandon moscow, but yeah bad idea.  Oh and good luck defending Russia from 70 IPCs of Germany/Italy with can openers and all that Jazz.

Add in the fact that most German openings leave a portion of the UK fleet alive, try to threaten Karelia with overwhelming force, and only leave token troops on France and why wouldn’t you go after them?  Add to that the fact that Japan’s opening moves typically pose absolutely no threat to anyone (other than IPCs you cant defend anyway!) until J3 at the earliest, usually not until J4, and why wouldn’t you ignore them?

I really think the key to stopping KGF is to rethink typical G/J turn 1 moves.  To what I don’t know, but right now Germany screams “kill me or I kill russia” and Japan screams “i’m huge but can’t reach just yet”.  I’m also speaking of when NOs are being used.

KGF certainly isn’t dead, but to my liking, it depends too much on the dice.
Here’s what I mean:

In a KGF game, Japan is totally ignored. Japan will grow huge, and be knocking on Moscow’s door at turn 6,7 with enormous force, and then it’s Game Over.

So this means, that in any KGF game, the Allies MUST have taken Berlin by turn 6.
And to my knowledge and experience, that’s not an easy task, especially against some decent Axis players.

My games always go as follows when I am Axis, and the Allies are going KGF.
I open agressive on Russia with all land units, and all air and sea units are used to set GB 1 step back. I even invest in some Baltic navy to hold UK back a bit more.

Sure, Russia is now in a luxury position, with no German reinforcements available untill G3. But Russia will soon be stretched thin, and the German/Russian front will fall into a back and forth game.
At the mean time the UK and USA are prepping for an invasion, being pestered by German and Italian navy and air.

At around turn 4, Japan is annoying USA through the Pacific, next to slowly creeping up on Moscow.
By the time Germany slowly gets into trouble because all it’s navy and air is gone, and Russia finally is getting it’s big bonuses etc…they have to turn around to face the Japanese threat.

And thus…as the Allies…I will never go for a KGF, and I am frantically looking for other ways to deal with the Axis.
I do know, that when I am faced with a UK and USA threat as Japan in the Pacific…things definitely don’t go as smoothly as I hoped they would…

@Emperor:

@Woodstock:

I always somewhat like it if Ger loses to the British in Egypt. This way I know for sure that those 2 IPC’s are going to Italy, who could use it  alot better then the already not so poor Germans.
Sure. UK may have it’s NO for 1 more round, but so what?

I tend to agree.  I’m trying out a new tactic, sending the bomber agains the UK BB in SZ2 with the 2 SS from SZ7, and attacking Egypt with the usual ground forces.  The Egypt battle only has a 30% chance of success but the most likely outcome is UK holds with just the fighter.  Ripe picking for Italy, and UK is down a BB and TP from SZ2.

I usually send only 1 sub to SZ2, combined with a fighter and the bomber, and the other sub combined with 1 fighter to SZ12.

If Egypt holds the fighter + the fleet off the Med is intact, then the Italian fleet could be toast on UK1.

SZ2 should cost you the sub (so what), and maybe 1 fighter (Germany can handle that), SZ12 might cost you a sub (again, so what) and the fighter (again, Germany can spare it), but the Italian fleet survives.

Also, if you take only 1 ship from SZ12, that’s enough already to save the Italian navy.
(So if your sub is killed in the first round, and a british ship is destroyed, just retreat).

This way, Italian fleet is safe, Egypt should be in German hands or else in Italy on IT1, plus you still get that juicy BB.

@Rakeman:

I don’t see why you would be pissed… there are many mechanics in A&A, since the beginning, that have made KGF the best strategy.  As long as these mechanics remain, so will KGF.  Amazingly, Enhanced completely cured KGF  :-D Too bad the official game can’t do it right.  The only thing that pissed me off was when I found out what victory cities were chosen, saw one in Canada, and facepalmed hard  :-P

As there are 4 types of playing (1941 w/ NO, 1942 w/ NO, both without) it will be hard to make a definite assessment of balance, but I still can’t wait for TripleA to get AA50.  If you doubt the power of KGF, I’ll see you online and show you a thing or two  :lol:

Triple A already has AA:50. Granted, it’s an unstable version, but it works perfect. Just some minor bugs in really complex battle situations, but nothing that can’t overcome the -edit-function.

I always somewhat like it if Ger loses to the British in Egypt. This way I know for sure that those 2 IPC’s are going to Italy, who could use it  alot better then the already not so poor Germans.
Sure. UK may have it’s NO for 1 more round, but so what?

You might wanna move that AUS IC to SA.
I’ve been toying around with it, and if you send the 2 original british fighters there, you can have an impressive UK fleet at turn 2. (1 AC + 2 FTR, something else to your liking, plus maybe the australian fleet, if they survived).

Japan can’t ignore that, and it gives you a starting point to reinforce/reclaim India. Toss in a few US ships in the Pacific, minor nuisance from Russia, and Japan is not having the field day they normally have…I hope.

UK can still put pressure on German shores with what they have left, america can still funnel troops to Morocco (or hop to Norway via UK), and Russia should just play their normal thing, while using there eastern forces effectively.
(Maybe not stack them at Buryata, but drawm them back, lure Japanse closer through Siberia, and when they are in range of a newly built Russian fighter, strike back with 7 inf + 1 ftgh, which should be enough to give the advancing japanese troops a small punch)

…or something in those likes…

@Cmdr:

No, I have found that Karelia, if it falls, does so only long enough for Germany to get the 7 IPC for it. (2 for the land, 5 for the National Objective) after that either Russia or one of the other two allies liberates it.

That ^. I agree.

I just started an AAA game, and bought an IC in France.
I did it once before, and won the game. Whether or not that was thanks to that IC, is hard to say.
All the time it felt more as a burden, then a benefit. It was reduced to popping just some inf every time, just enough to make sure it wouldnt fall.

Difference this time, is that Japan will go for UK’s IPC hardcore, whereas the other time it was fiddling a bit with china and siberia. Italia is going for another approach as well.
This will reduce UK’s abilities to be a threat to france, and Germany should be able to pop some trannies and ships in the med, for immediate shipping to the eastern front, or other directions.

Thanks. And I could care less about that transport though, it’s India I am after, and it’s India I will take.
The priceof 1 transport is nothing compared to an India with an IC already nice in place, and no enemy units inbetween India and Russia  :-D

(plus my 2 loaded AC’s, escorted with a cruiser and destroyer will take care of those subs in the round thereafter to avenge the brave captain of the transport  :-P )

Q about subs (may have been asked already, but to wade through 24 pages of posts…  :| ):

In the rulebook it states that any sea unit can choose to attack a sub, and can end it’s combat, and non-combat, move in a sea zone only containing enemy subs.

So…does that go for transports aswell? I’d like to shuttle some troops to India (which is in Britain’s hands) with Japan, but there are 2 subs in SZ35.
That shouldn’t be a problem right?

@Subotai:

I don’t mind people suggesting rules for what should or should not be the official AA50 rules, I have strong opinions myself, there are many things I agree with, and other things which should be different.

There’s too many threads and posts which turn into “I will change such and such rule because…”  :roll:

Don’t get me wrong, I love to discuss what should be different in AA50 and AAR, and what will hopefully change in the next A&A global war game from Larry Harris. But when I turn to the AA50 forums I expect to see posts about strats, what is smart and what is stupid moves and decisions.
Is a German naval strat more efficient, does it make it easier to win the game, and what naval units is better for what purpose, not if DD’s should be able to block sub movements  :roll:

We could have a designated category in the house rule forum of what house rules should make it into official optional or mandatory rules.

I never play with house rules, and the only change that is needed, at least in Classic and AAR, which differs from the official rules is a bid for the side that is weaker. A bid is probably needed for AA50 also, but different players disagree on this matter, so we cannot make a safe conclusion of balance like AAR. But the only change I will be doing when playing AA50 is bid to either axis or allies if it’s needed to balance the game. And the 4 new optional rules make sure that there is no need for house rules anymore. Tech is optional, SBR can be nerfed with interceptors, NOs make more money for all countries. The closing of Dardanelles make it more historical. Why can’t we all be happy players?

Quoted for truth :)

I like Darth Maximus’ idea of liberating one of the 2 4-IPC Islands, and then build a british IC there.
Sure, it would take 3 or 4 rounds before the US can safely hold it, but if they can, and UK can start building there, Japan is gonna be in trouble.

In those first 3 or 4 rounds UK should do everything it can to preserve IPC’s and it’s income, just threatening Germany to keep it honest (Russia should be able to withstand Germany for a while, especially if Japan is busy with the Yanks).

Not saying this can work, but it’s a complete different approach, which is worth thinking about.

The Longest Day

This one movie, which I forgot the name of, of an modern AC that thanks to some storm travels back in time, and finds himself right before Pearl Harbor. Now he has the choice, unleash his mighty force of F14’s and F18’s against the pitiful Japanese zero’s and change history, or……
Terrible plot, but pretty cool nontheless.

Let’s give this one a boost.
Any dutch players around, feeling for a get together?