Dark skies and other strategy questions

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    I’m fairly new to A&A Global (one in person game and 3 on triplea which I also just discovered), but have played lots of other A&A and strategy games. Because I’ve just gotten into it (and I’ve had some time) I’ve been obsessing with it (and these forums) and I had some random strategy questions thought this was a good place to post them.

    First, I had read (here) about a strategy that some people use called Dark Skies where Germany prioritizes bomber builds and uses them essentially for strategic bombing, support for land unit stacks in Russia, and to prevent a UK fleet from being built and a US fleet from coming in with land units.  The effectiveness of this strategy was based on the exterior lines of the Allies  + the range of those bombers from the West German or France airbase. The power of this was not just that bombers are a powerful ranged unit that can do a lot of damage but that the threat of their attack would shape allied responses. The US can’t easily send troops because it must both sufficiently protect its transports and deal with Japan, so it would have to hold back. But those bombers would simultaneously threaten the UK and Russia and can Strat bomb to limit production and support land unit stacks to take territory.

    There was debate here as to whether this was a game breaking strategy, a potentially good one for the Germans but not unbeatable, or suboptimal (most of the accounts I saw were the former but I saw all three). I looked for people’s counters to it but most of the solutions seemed to be rule changes. Most of this seem to have been posted a few years ago. I’m wondering what the status of this is now and if there is any more of a consensus on its effectiveness. I’m also wondering about the specifics of playing it? I understand you use it to support stacks against Russia, against American/British efforts to build a fleet in the Atlantic, and to bomb factories. But what are the key targets or goals with their use. What other builds go with it. What is the timing of the Axis DOWs that works best with it?

    The reason I’m asking is I’m unconvinced (and using triplea I was playing around with it but not particularly effectively). My own thinking is that a significant number of bombers is going to be useful alongside other units, but a strategy that prioritizes them as the main build seems to be high risk (it can potentially fall apart if the allies get one significantly better than the average roll at the right time – this is an issue with any strategy in A&A but perhaps more so with this). I also thought there would be some effective ways to counter it simply by the allies (and primarily the Americans) making unequal exchanges and sacrificing units to force the Germans to use the bombers (reducing the bomber stack, putting the bombers out of position, and ensuring that for at least one turn, they can’t use them on anyone else). It seemed to me (again from playing around on tripleA) that the US could play this role using only half its income leaving enough to pressure Japan. The little bit I saw suggesting counters seemed to suggest something along these lines but I didn’t find much that was specific.

    Obviously, I haven’t played against this strategy or enough A&A Global yet, so I realize I may just not be getting it. Thought people here with more experience of the game could fill that in.

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    the second question I was going to ask was about the first turn hit on the Italian fleet in sz 97. My understanding from the forum posts I’ve read, that this is a pretty common move but it is high risk (at least if the Germans drop a fighter there), and one that also kills the UK med fleet (and possibly some air power).

    In my initial games as the allies, I avoided that and instead only went for sz 96, pulling the fleet behind the Suez and landing the fighters (now hitting 96 with one destroyer) back to Egypt. The Gibraltar fighter and cruiser could then support the UK in the Atlantic.

    I get the value of keeping hitting that fleet and limiting the ability of the Italians to move units into North Africa. My thinking was that the UK med fleet is too valuable to lose early and that there would be attacks of opportunity without the scramble, once the Italians were committed to using it. I also thought there might be an advantage to encourage the Italians to move more units South (rather than East).  Anyway, I’m curious how others are thinking about this and whether there are good openers with the UK in the med that don’t involve hitting 97.

    And sorry for combining different topics (or if these have been discussed to death elsewhere)

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15

    The MAIN reason to do the taranto raid is to neuter italy. Yes,  the UK med fleet is valuable, but pulling it out of the med is often a poor choice. You might be able to keep egypt but italy has an easy job closing the Suez, trans Jordan or egypt. The med fleet then sits in the red Sea/Indian sea doing next to nothing

    Secondly and more importantly the taranto raid prevents in most cases 1 or 2 Italian objectives such as north Africa and roman empire. If you play it right egypt, gib and North Africa is safe,  without taranto it is more often not.

    If you can merge med and 110 fleet with air base at Gibraltar it is a different story.

    Key point: prevent Italian objectives and taranto does this

  • TripleA

    Okay! Here is the dark skies break down, rounds to buy bombers are round 1 (bomb London and sea lion or sink UK in med then blast UK in Egypt for Italy walk in. Next bomber buy round (you should get mech armor rounds 2-5) is rounds 4 -7(depending on when you are attacking Russia because you buying it the round before you all in to Max the odds out).

    There you go that is the strat. Also bomb the Russians if you are not blasting Egypt. Easy.

  • TripleA

    There is the Japan all in strategy. This involves taking UK Pacific then sending everything middle East while bombing the Russians and suiciding all planes on UK in the middle East… Basically you auto win Europe by vc count, this is a hyper cheese strat.

  • TripleA

    The hyper cheese strategy works because china can’t leave China and Siberia is too far to make it to Russia before the G6 all in you dead gg GTFO . Yep.

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    thanks for the responses. I had a couple of follow up questions.

    On Taranto, how much does the move by Germany to drop a fighter in for the scramble affect the attack. Without the fighter, it is pretty good odds (86% according to triple A’s calculator) but with it, it is 52%. it just seems to me that in the latter case, there is a lot to lose (that is hard for the UK to replace) for a 50% chance of seriously hurting Italy. Almost half the time, Italy can still do what you were trying to prevent and now you have lost your fleet (and possibly all your air units) to counter it later.

    If one doesn’t do that, are their other options that people use? Is moving the fleet to Gibraltar (leaving a destroyer back as a blocker) an option? You mentioned this is worth it if you can get the 110 fleet to join. Can it be worth it without? The Germans could hit it (if the Italians gave them a place to land in Algeria) but hurting the German air force and pulling them out of Europe for a turn in round 2 might make that worth it. Maybe? Is Red Sea always a bad move? I take your point that Italy can grab Trans-Jordan and block them but that can be taken back.

    On Dark Skies,

    A bomber buy on turns 4-7 makes a lot more sense to me as that can support the tanks and mechs bought earlier on the push to Moscow and support counter attacks on US/UK landings. But the way I had read about it is that it was a strategy where bombers were the primary buy from round 1 (the posts I had read identified a flexibility to buy other units as needed but would aim for 2-4 bombers a turn). Am I off on that or does dark skies also include that approach as well? And if it does, what is the status of it as a strategy?

    Thanks again on the responses.

  • '19 '17 '16

    @oysteilo:

    The MAIN reason to do the taranto raid is to neuter italy. Yes,  the UK med fleet is valuable, but pulling it out of the med is often a poor choice. You might be able to keep egypt but italy has an easy job closing the Suez, trans Jordan or egypt. The med fleet then sits in the red Sea/Indian sea doing next to nothing

    Secondly and more importantly the taranto raid prevents in most cases 1 or 2 Italian objectives such as north Africa and roman empire. If you play it right egypt, gib and North Africa is safe,  without taranto it is more often not.

    If you can merge med and 110 fleet with air base at Gibraltar it is a different story.

    Key point: prevent Italian objectives and taranto does this

    Highlighted sentence is my experience in quite a number of face to face games.

    Taranto is optimal by far in my experience. In a raid I did today, I left the CV and Malta fighter out but brought in 2 from London.  A major gamble! Killed the BB but left a TT in SZ97. There is still a major chance of losing Egypt in that game although I think I will be able to retake it. I digress. I don’t know how you (OP) got to 50%? Even if you only bring one fighter (plus the bomber) from London, should be about 80% with the scramble, which is unlikely. Gibraltar fighter normally helps in SZ96, with the SZ91 cruiser.


  • I’ve combined in the med off Gibraltar a few times with a destroyer blocker and I liked it.  I didn’t buy a airbase there either.  If you keep North Africa the Germans can’t hit you with their airforce.

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15

    Farmboy: you can bring in fighters from London or Scotland to the taranto raid to give you better odds. This means you can reach with 3 fighters (f.eks 2 from London and the Malta fighter)  1 tac, 1 bomber,  carrier, destroyer and cruiser.  In this case you are over 90%, even with  3 fighters scrambling. Good luck!


  • As the bovine said, get one or two bombers on G1 and then more on G4-7. The fast movers that you have on G2-3 can force Russia to retreat back to Moscow. There is little chance to take Moscow unless he makes a mistake so head down to the oil fields. You should be making 70+ per round and Moscow can’t step out of their Capitol. Likely you are binning them to minimize infantry production. A few fast movers head off to Siberia by G7.

    Meanwhile the Allies need a big  fleet to safeguard transports. That limits the invasion force. If you transport 2 ground units to Scandinavia, it will be hard or impossible for them to invade. If you build 3 ground units a round in France, Western Europe will be more costly to invade. Eventually the Allies will get a beachhead, but around that time Moscow will fall or Japan will be out of control. Obviously dice can mess up this plan, but I have rarely lost in a no-bid game. The ability to simultaneously threaten:

    1. Moscow
    2. Middle East
    3. Scandinavia
    4. Atlantic
    5. W. Europe
    6. Med

    Allows you to pick the time to strike weak stacks with a bit of support from cannon fodder. I would say that Axis has an 85% chance of winning a no bid game against an equal opponent with this plan.


  • "Dark Skies’ is for losers… real NERDS.  A bunch of bombers just can’t walk into Moscow.  You got to roll in there with tanks!

    Build a couple loaded carriers and those bombers will turn into hapless baby sparrows… you can stomp on their beaks and turn them into dust!  CRUSH THEM!  INTO DUST!  :x

    To wit:

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    I didn’t think the of the fighters coming from UK (in my limited experience so far, they get used for scramble, defense of UK, and supporting the destroyer in taking out subs or the German battleship. So I’ve only simulated the combat with the UK bomber, the Egypt fleet and the Malta fighter. That obviously makes a difference and makes it much safer. I’d guess with 80% (1 UK fighter) to 95% 2 (UK fighter) odds, most Italy players aren’t going to try to scramble either. The British will lose the carrier and the two fighters after from a German counter but that will take some of the German air out of the game too.

    thanks all for taking the time to walk me through this.


  • @farmboy:

    I didn’t think the of the fighters coming from UK (in my limited experience so far, they get used for scramble, defense of UK, and supporting the destroyer in taking out subs or the German battleship. So I’ve only simulated the combat with the UK bomber, the Egypt fleet and the Malta fighter. That obviously makes a difference and makes it much safer. I’d guess with 80% (1 UK fighter) to 95% 2 (UK fighter) odds, most Italy players aren’t going to try to scramble either. The British will lose the carrier and the two fighters after from a German counter but that will take some of the German air out of the game too.

    thanks all for taking the time to walk me through this.

    If the Germans make smart attacks turn 1 on the RN it doesn’t make sense to scramble.  Now if they get cute and try to do too much then a scramble may be worth it.

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    @IKE:

    @farmboy:

    I didn’t think the of the fighters coming from UK (in my limited experience so far, they get used for scramble, defense of UK, and supporting the destroyer in taking out subs or the German battleship. So I’ve only simulated the combat with the UK bomber, the Egypt fleet and the Malta fighter. That obviously makes a difference and makes it much safer. I’d guess with 80% (1 UK fighter) to 95% 2 (UK fighter) odds, most Italy players aren’t going to try to scramble either. The British will lose the carrier and the two fighters after from a German counter but that will take some of the German air out of the game too.

    thanks all for taking the time to walk me through this.

    If the Germans make smart attacks turn 1 on the RN it doesn’t make sense to scramble.  Now if they get cute and try to do too much then a scramble may be worth it.

    Yeah. I wouldn’t use them for a scramble in turn 1 (depending as you say, on the German attacks) but in turn 2.

    I have only had a chance to play this a couple of times (and a couple of more times playing around in triplea), but so far I’ve used the fighters to hit surviving subs and/or the battleship near UK in turn 1 and (assuming no sea lion) I have tried to put 3 allied fighters in UK and 3 in Scotland (this means building 1 and moving the Gibraltar fighter up) so that I can rebuild a UK fleet in 109. I figured the German air force could still probably take it out but if they are going barbarossa it was worth it to pull the German airforce West and to take out half of it on turn 2.

Suggested Topics

  • 19
  • 19
  • 3
  • 14
  • 12
  • 6
  • 13
  • 3
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

49

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts