Strategy Guide

@Blitz:

Allies will attempt to counter this by blocking your Baltic and med. fleet for a turn. This however proves futile most of the time because your fleet can simply meet off France’s coast in your noncombat where you can place the fresh AC you built for your G2 Purchases.

UK buys 1 AC and 1 DD on UK1, and moves the BB and the 2 TRNs to SZ7. UK places the CV on SZ7 (landing the 2 fighters on the AC). and the DD on SZ6 to block German Baltic Fleet.
US moves to land on Algeria and block German Med fleet (move the DD if there’s a SUB there)
R moves sub to SZ7.

On G’s turn it will only be able to attack the allied fleet on SZ7 with 5 ftrs and 1 bmr (against 1 BB, 1 AC, 2 FTRs, 2 TRN, 1 SUB = 20% chance of sinking all ships), thus preventing any unification of both German fleets.

@Bunnies:

(And why am I always beating my favorite dead horse “look at the board, look at the board, look at the board”?)

Because it’s so unrelevant? Or maybe your horse is to slow? ;)

So, you say, you specified that a country was deadzoned and was being traded.  Ask yourself if that’s enough to formulate a grand strategy.  Of course it’s not.

Not? ;)
Don’t get me wrong, I know that my game will only some dilettantish moving of plastic figures as long I have no planning above the next three moves. Know yourself, know your enemy … all that stuff from all that books.
But I also must take a look on the little decisions I have to make, like that example above. If I make such little things wrong, no strategy can help me. And I think, an strategy must pay attention to the overall board situation (as you said; not a dead horse in my eyes), my own weakenings in gameplay and the player that sits on the other side of the table. To judge that situation right and create the adequate strategy is a thing that I have to do by myself, and all the postings on this board can only help a little. But for that little tactical decisions and tiny precious moves which the game have in store these boards are an eye opener for me. And that’s why I’m looking for such little, delimited solutions for a special problem and hope, I’ ll remember that solution in my next game.

Conclusion:  Germany has superior trading ability.  Germany may leave defense forces of 2 infantry or more per territory, particularly in Belorussia and Ukraine early (since UK/US probably can’t drop units into those territories early, unlike Karelia and Archangel).  However, Russia should avoid leaving infantry in territories if it can help it.

I’ll try to remember that.

Note leaving infantry behind is sometimes good re: Tim’s post.

Known, but noted again. :)

And: thank you for your post.

@newpaintbrush:

So are you saying that the Norway-Wrus-Ukr attack is bad for LL and for ADS for the SAME REASONS?  No, of course not.  See my last post.  Would you like to expound on the idea that what is good for ADS is good for LL and vice versa?  For I disagree.

My contention is that what is good in LL is good in ADS HOWEVER what is good in ADS may not be good in LL.
My point about the nor/wrus/ukr battle is that just b/c you may succeed in certian battles (either individual battles here and there or a few battles taken in the same turn) in LL way way way more in ADS does not make it a sound strategy for the entire game.  And I laid out just a couple of example where you could have high odds battles but it hurts you in the long run (the Moscow scenerio and the crazy ala move etc.)

It is much easier to translate LL strats to ADS.

I don’t think I said this triple would “inevitablely” fail in LL, I believe I said it “may” fail which in a way would confirm what the ADS odds told you in rd 1.
I certainly think there could be a coerrelation between LL odds and ADS odds.

Due to the nature of LL we know you can have a battle of a 100% success, which in ADS may be 90-95%.  I don’t think it is then unreasonable to think that multiple battles in LL where you have 80% success awould translate to maybe 65% in ADS.  Thus it isn’t unreasonable to think a LL battle with 60% success rate may then indeed be 40% in ADS (per your triple example).

So when playing a game in ADS if you have a threshold to actually go through with most battles (say you would like a 60-70% chance to succeed in ADS) that does not mean you’d have 60-70 in LL, the LL odds would probably be much closer to 80.  So when you see a battle at 40% success in ADS it should probably tell you that you have maybe 60% or so in LL BUT those AREN’T great odds for LL, considering you can be much more efficient in your attacks in LL.

60% odds are not that great for LL, considering the best LL players probably should win about 75-80% of their games.  Why lower your standards to 60%?  It just doesn’t make sense to me.  Maybe it is a good opening and causes enough damage to Germany, but I think it can leave Russia a bit too thin.

And yes there are times where 1-1 is a good trade and even times where you come out on the low end but the battle can still be deemed a success, but I don’t think Russia 1 is that time esp since the Axis can usually make an Africa push and Japan can make early gains in Asia, and it still takes the UK/US a few turns to get their shuck going.

Edit:

I should also say that by strat, I mean a series of moves (or buys) that take place over several turns not something a player may do in only one move or one turn.

In a good KJF, Germany will be stopped before getting 50 IPC, Switch.  Any layman player who puts some thought into it can easily slow Germany enough to prevent them from being at the doorstep of Moscow before Round 10, at which point, Japan should be castrated.

The trick is to put 2-3 transports of troops into Africa a turn.  Easy to do without building a single extra transport.  Actually, odds are, you’re putting 4 transports in a round.  Maybe more, if England is focused on Africa and fighters for Russia.  America can take Japan without England’s help.  Just use the English fleet to make it near impossible to sink the American fleet and let America take the islands.

:lol: he he you made it funny  :lol:

-LT04

@ajgundam5:

indeed i have read this … very very in depth

I was inspired that night :-)

There are a few threads already posted on bidding and how to do it…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=1146.0
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=5580.0

Those should get you started.

You can also read the essays on the subject at DAAK
http://www.daak.de/indexe.php?sprache=e
(click DAAK-club rules along the left side, bidding is the second topic that will come up in the main window)

That should get you up and running.

If you still have questions after reviewing those, please feel free to ask :-)

88 knows that I agree with him;

“#1 The most fun you’ll have is by trial and error. There is no perfect strategy.”

The one tidbit that I will add in any thread or discussion in any of the posts,

“What are the victory conditions you have set for the game?”

If you are after a minor victory (8 cities) then Germany can focus on a land war, navy be damned.
However, a major victory (10 cities) or total victory (12 cities) is going to require an Axis navy to reach the 10th/12th city.

IMO, I have a German Navy at the start of the game that is easier to add to and maintain in order to play a role in the 10/12 city VC (Victory Condition).