@brian-cannon I think the key is for Germany to stack ukr, trade cauc, and prevent russia from stacking cauc. Russia is forced to trade karelia and cauc. Russia will want to trade belorussia. Russia can’t afford to stack karelia because germany will move into Caucasus. This 3 territory trading, especially if germany leaves more than 1 inf in karelia and cauc will quickly exhaust Russia.
Germany buys max infantry every round and allows uk to trade france & northwest europe. Germany shouldn’t overcommit to defending western europe. Focus resources on pushing to moscow. Once Cauc is stacked, winning is within sight.
Last post for reals? For this subject for a while anyways? Hm . . . 🙄 I’ll see how I feel at the end of this post.
USSR. Stack building/bleeding is fundamental. You can do multinational defense, but only one nation can attack at a time. What does that mean in practical terms? If Germany walks up to USSR and USSR wants to push Germany off, USSR needs a lot of power to do it, especially if Japanese fighters reinforced, which they can and really often should do even against KJF.
So what happens if USSR is sending a chunk of its power to east Asia? Those units are way out of position to push off any German pressure, and even if they turn around and head home immediately, they still used valuable turns just moving around. Some players like to claim you can “feint” or other clever-sounding phrases, but the fact is, out of position means out of position; your opponent can clearly see when you’re out of position and should play appropriately.
So when USSR sends stuff at Japan, it should be with the realization that it’s a big commitment, it’s a big problem for USSR. It might not SEEM like four or five infantry is a big deal, but think about what happens if you position seven infantry in the north and one or two infantry in China. That’s nine infantry, that’s 27 IPCs. If you lost all of northeast Asia, it’ll take how long for that to add up to 27 IPCs? A long time.
And if you put up a “token resistance” that’s often just silly. Japan wants to trample USSR anyways, all you do is stick a valuable 3-IPC unit where Japan probably has an odds-on attack to destroy it with no losses and take control of the territory anyways. Japan doesn’t even need to go out of its way, it just grabs the unexpected bonus and rolls on.
But then you look at all the problems KJF faces, especially in the 1942 Online implementation, and think “I need something extra”.
But remember again - the more USSR sends east, the less it has west, the earlier USSR in Europe collapses. It’s not enough that USSR units can race home and reach Russia right before Germany hits. If USSR units were pushed west instead of east, they could deter Germany from even advancing in the first place, without that deterrent Germany can come on fast and hard.
The takeaway here is - if USSR is bleeding out its Europe stack to push Asia, there had better be a real nice reward in there, and regardless USSR’s push can only be temporary - USSR just doesn’t have the time to use a chunk of its forces to mess about unless the Axis are wildly incompetent. Which I suppose you could say usually they are in the 1942 Online meta but still.
By extension, if you’re using just slow infantry then you’re not going to be able to redirect at speed at all. Your infantry will be trudging home after having trudged deep into east Asia and will be totally too late to do anything useful in all likelihood.
So if you want to push KJF, there’s two things to remember for USSR that you don’t need so much in KGF - tanks and bombers.
Yes, USSR tanks, you can use against Karelia, it’s a whole thing. But you need infantry/artillery for unit count and to threaten the big strafe - you hit a German territory, deplete its infantry, move your infantry up. Germany lost infantry, you lost infantry, but Germany can’t really just pull more infantry out of its pocket, it takes a long time to march up. Your infantry, on the other hand, basically just rolled out of bed into action. So then when Germany hits, its infantry shield is a lot weaker, it can’t shield its tanks, it gets messy. If you do USSR tanks, you have much better flexibility but you lose out on raw hitting power for the strafe, and that’s why if you’re greedy and think you can get away with it, you push USSR infantry/artillery as a rule and tanks only situationally.
But USSR tanks in KJF are much different. The application probably isn’t just that you’re trying some sort of counterthreat against Karelia and/or Ukraine. Centrally located tanks along with a small infantry contingent and a bit of air coverage can be a big headache for Axis to deal with.
Imagine you have two tanks on a West Russia stack. You defend West Russia - but you also also threaten Kazakh if Japan tries to push and hold. Imagine now you have six infantry on Russia that can hit Kazakh. Say you can use those six infantry and two tanks to hit and weather any Japanese counter. But then, you need six infantry ready at Russia, which means they’re not at West Russia, which means USSR is splitting its forces.
But now imagine you have four tanks on West Russia and two infantry on Russia. Your defense on West Russia is stronger, as are your potential attacks against nearby European territories. Your ability to hit and hold against Kazakh is reduced. And you might think that’s a tradeoff that means it isn’t so great. But not quite.
If you correctly understand and apply stack building and bleeding you’ll remember - you can only use one nation to attack at a time, but multiple nations can defend. So what seems to be a worse position at Kazakh isn’t necessarily so, as UK can reinforce USSR’s position.
I think even newer players should understand that Germany’s tanks are valuable to Germany, especially against KGF. But in KJF, USSR tanks assume similar importance. They are very very good for threatening multiple theaters while also defending and it’s that threat range along with allied reinforcements that make USSR tanks really very good.
So does that mean you should hit West Russia/Ukraine sending only 2 USSR tanks to Ukraine? Or that you should retreat from Ukraine under some conditions?
I could run some numbers and projections but eh, I’m taking a break. But remember, USSR being able to reposition quickly is worth a lot in KJF.
@ericb I don’t see how it’s “easy” for USSR to hold off tank pressure from India while managing to not die to Germany, unless you’re not taking India in your games until like round 5 and you’re also playing against a 100% KGF from the Allies.
@boston_nwo this happened to you on tripleA ? I only experienced this once. Maybe the trick is to figure out a circle of “Regulars” on whom you can depend; I suspect that the way the play by mail works on 1942 is not actually conducive to games not taking forever and ever after 🙂
if you ever wanna play a game on tripleA ; write me a PM 🙂
The game uses the profile of the UK player there because there are majorly UK ships in the zone. It can’t use the profile of the SU player for the sub and the profile of the UK player for the rest of the fleet as all the ships are one defender.
I wouldnt recommend going french west africa US1, you’re correct in that G cant really send the med fighters to kill it. But you lose out on getting Norway/Finland US2, which is the fastest timing I’ve found without sacrificing a UK2 nw-eur/france trade for maximum pressure.
G isnt gonne capture any valuable territories before G4 anyaways(assuming 1 UK inf blocks egypt UK1, south africa inf blocks sudan UK2), so you dont need US stuff in africa until US3.
I find this new thing which is steadily increasing…which is i open the list of potential games in multiplayer ( not ranked) and lets say the list shows 6 games…I can only enter 2 of them, the other 4 are “blocked in a sense” you click and nothing happens…is their some new thing we need to do like update the game? And i cant believe for a second that only 6 games in total around the earth are being played…what gives?
Based on my preliminary results, that advice helped me achieve exactly what I wanted. Thank you. The AI Goes down every time obviously. I will have to find some better allies to play against, wish me luck. And, just maybe that essay may show up one day. Not sure I want to frustrate you all with every detail yet. But, if I do make a guide on the AI Total Victory, its over about turn 11-12 unless I optimize it more. No condescension intended, nice to meet yall. If I am an eagle you are my wings, and such.🦅
AXIS 11-17-20 RV Milky!
(Edit reason total ipc is so high is I was on track to take both the west coast US, and Hawaii same turn but spammed thru hit assignment on Hawaii, blundered it twice and didn’t bother doing anything else for a few turns but spam the enter key and well, gotta get ready for a test at work… so yeah, no misleading intended either it was turn 11. I’ll just have to do it again tomorrow)
Change combat phase so first battle doesn’t auto-start
Add “go back” from before any dice are rolled in combat phase to purchase phase
Add “go back” from end turn (after mobilization) to beginning of noncombat.
Forming 1942 Second Edition and 1942 Online research/testing group for strategy/tactics. Writeups to be published as guides in time. Games will be played on TripleA v5 and 1942 Online and TripleA v5 (Larry Harris Tournament Setup) without bids.
Applicants must be comfortable with discussion of mathematics and exact details and are expected to contribute meaningfully. This is not a group for casual players, nor is it a group for players that want to develop “secret” lines of play.
@Brian-Cannon I’m a bit late getting to this but as @aardvarkpepper suggested, the battle calculator (hosted by this very site at http://calc.axisandallies.org/) is your friend here. Basically, before committing to your moves, take a look at what your opponent’s possible moves are going to be and run battle calculations on what would happen if your opponent played a certain way (IMPORTANT NOTE: Remember to set the “rounds of combat” setting to “all” and “10,000X” (more simulated battles = more accurate prediction) and to also set the “luck” setting to “1942” and “Pure Luck” to be accurate to AAO.
I’m not going to speak to your specific game example because that’s not what this thread was about, but I’ll give you the same advice other people gave when faced faced the “Dark Skies” strategy. Basically, a large intimidating air stack can only attack one large stack (be it a land stack of ~10 INF or greater or a naval stack of ~5 Destroyers or greater) in one round. Because of this, you need to be a bit greedy and push forward with all of your large stacks simultaneously, creating potentially-game-winning threats in multiple regions of the board. This puts the Allies in a bad spot because they’ll be forced to choose between solidly destroying one of your threats (and letting the other ones get off scott-free to accomplish its objective) and taking multiple risky fights trying to stop all of your threats (which will probably result in the air stack getting severely reduced/destroyed, making it your victory). I’ve been talking in abstracts here but I can give a rough-ish approximation based on your game. Don’t take this as a one-to-one guide on what you should’ve done in that game, I have no idea what the board looked like:
Scenario: USA is ferrying air stacks from W. USA -> Yakut -> Center Map (Moscow). USA is using said stack to wipe out anything that moves (i.e. Japanese navy, Germany trading attempts in Russia, etc.).
Threat #1 - Get Germany’s entire army (or at least a good chunk of it) in Caucasus, threatening Moscow and demanding that USA keep the air stack in or around Moscow.
Threat #2 - Move out with Japan’s fleet and either threaten taking Hawaii+India for the last VCs (you said you had Karelia earlier and I’m assuming with a strategy like this the Allies weren’t taking Philippines/Rome/Paris anytime soon) OR threaten challenging/destroying the US fleet off of Alaska. If taking the first option here you’d just need to spend a turn or two spamming land units on Japan proper to avoid a landing in Japan. Japan is really easy to defend because of it’s 8 production.
With a large-enough Japanese Navy threatening game-over in one part of the board (by either sinking the USN (thus shutting off the stream of air units into Russia) and the German Army threatening game-over in another (Moscow), the USA in this hypothetical scenario is forced to use their air stack to either sink the IJN or wipe out the German Army. If they sink the IJN the Nazis grab Moscow and win the game, and if they wipe out the Caucasus stack the IJN accomplishes its objective and you win the game. If the USA tries for both they’ll probably fail unless the AAO RNG screws you, in which case you do what the rest of us good folks do and make a thread/post complaining about it.
tl;dr Use the Battle Calculator. Make multiple threats so the Allies need to pick one to deal with and the other(s) can prevail without issue. Don’t fear the reaper, as the song goes.
@JuliusBorisovBeamdog That’s similar enough to what was done in AAC, the “Russia can’t attack on their first turn” rule. Basically, it gave Germany a turn to get their valuable Tanks and their irreplaceable FTR out of their indefensible positions in Russia. This change gives Germany a stronger initial force, which snowballs, as it takes Russia/UK longer to kill Germany, which in turn gives Japan more time to gobble up IPCs on their side of the map.
For 42SE, giving the Allies a turn to not die saves:
The USSR IC in Karelia, which means it could be a feasible point to hold for a few rounds.
The entire UK Fleet, which speeds up the UK/US’s deployment to Europe/Russia/Africa.
The US Atlantic Fleet, as some German openings favor sending a sub or two after the US East Coast on G1.
The US Pacific Fleet, as no J1 attack on it is possible.
The US FTR in China, which can be redeployed to either help the Soviets or link up with the Pacific Fleet.
@Gargantua said in My Body Is Ready:
I would encourage the dev team to code a general profile setting AND an option during NCM to custom set OOL (order of loss) for any given territory, outside of the basic parameters.
quoting myself for Djensen’s benefit 🙂
And my intent was as others have noted. NOT a mandatory prompt, a right click on a territory or SZ during NCM, OR it could a prompt just AFTER placement which could have a SKIP option. And the information will be SECRET. The attacker will not know their opponents OOL intentions.
@aardvarkpepper Well if you are interested in developing an AI or improving the AI for A&A games and for an implementation much closer to the actual game then you should consider TripleA as we are always looking for contributions: https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea
Perceptions on biased or non-independent dice are due to a host of human perception biases rather than any issue with calculation. A pseudo RNG library is available in every major programming language. People love to complain about how the dice are “not fair” but never back it up with an empirical statistical test or propose an alternate hypothesis in number generation that differs from a [1,2,3,4,5,6] uniform and independent event space.
The main way to solve user complains would be to implement Low Luck or implement a non-independent number generation. League of Legends implements that latter on critical hit chances where each non-critical attack increases the likelihood that the next attack is critical. Both of these would reduce the variance of the dice distributions.