• '17 '16 '13 '12

    The best way to evaluate this strategy is to test it out against a worthwhile opponent.


  • taamvan, there are many of great strategies on these forums, but you cant take them all as a unit for unit action plan.

    You don’t watch Young Grasshoppers J1 attack and do it unit for unit every time, or General Hand Grenades UK strategy and build those exact units each turn. You do however follow the framework.

    I don’t agree with those exact purchases every turn either, however, the framework of the strategy makes total sense. Each game is different, based on the opponents who you play, the direction that they take their strategy, and the luck of the dice. Having a broad strategy with short term, long term, specific, and broad goals is all required to be successful, and at the end of day, some luck as well.

  • '18 '17 '16

    Thank you for your comments everyone. There was a lot to respond to and I’m not that great at putting down on paper (or computer) what I’m trying to explain so I made a video to better explain what it is I’m trying to convey in regards to my strategy. The videos that I posted earlier in this thread were made for a different purpose and it would be a lot to expect people to watch them all just to respond to this thread. I tried to go further than the explanation of the first few turns and give you a better picture of what I do for the rest of the game.

    As I go back through these comments now I realize that there is one question that I forgot to address by Taamvan. He questioned my desire to allow Italy to take Cairo because I thought it was a good idea. No, I was serious. Try it sometime just to see what I’m talking about. You’ll find that the Italian troops on the continent of Africa die much more quickly than if you defend Cairo. I focus on turn 2 taking out the boats in the Med and the Italian troops in sub-Saharan Africa since I give them a pass on turn 1. I actually entice them over to Cairo by leaving only 1 infantry on Alexandria on turn 1 and 1UK infantry, 2 ANZAC infantry on Cairo turn 2 (just enough for them to want to use all of their Tobruk units). On turn 3 I smash them. If Germany would like to lose some planes I’m not fussy I’ll kill those too. You still have a lot of units in the area as the UK, including an awful lot of planes. Don’t forget your naval base on Persia has made you able to strike anywhere in Middle Earth. I don’t care if I lose my N.O. for an extra turn, I have more than enough money to stock 2 MIC’s anyway. I would rather not have to chase the Italians across North Africa. By doing that I can move onto my next objective that much more quickly.

    Here is a video to better explain my strategy and answer your questions and comments;
    https://youtu.be/F4q2C2lcKAA


  • GeneralHandGrenade,

    What are the Germans doing while you set all this up with the British? It does not sound like you are making a push into Southern Russia to contest the Germans which means by turn around turn 8 you’re going to be against a united Eurasia with Germany making 100+ IPCs. 30+ British IPCs in the Middle East does not stop 100+ IPCs worth of Germans coming through the Caucasus. In this scenario, the only way the British could hold onto the Middle East (and more importantly Cairo) is if the Americans are committing 100% of their resources on Western Europe but that can only happen if the Japanese have been contained to the Home Islands.

    Holding the Middle East is important to the Allies for the sake of denying the Axis those IPCs but it is not a game winning position.

    A gaming winning position is where:

    • The Japanese have been contained to the Home Islands,

    • The British hold the Middle East,

    • The Allies are beating/stalmating Germany in economics because of SBRs and convoy disruptions,

    • The Allies are threatening landings all over Western Europe from Gibraltar

  • '18 '17 '16

    The Germans are getting their butts kicked by my counter-attacking Russians. Don’t just tell me that I don’t know what I’m talking about, prove it. Watch the videos, learn how to play my Allies strategy and then try to beat it. When you’re done tell me exactly how you did it so I can become a better Axis player. I’m not saying that your opinion is worth nothing, I’m listening to everything that you and everyone else is saying to me. All I’m saying is that you need to actually put the pieces down on the board and play it out. I can’t wait to see how I can collect over 100 IPC’s for the Germans against this strategy.

    Don’t give it a half-hearted attempt either. This strategy relies on all of the Allied nations doing their parts and I detail every one of them in my videos. It’s not just about the UK.

  • '19 '17 '16

    I’m pretty sure ghg includes the standard strategy of flying fighters up from Persia to Moscow to defend it. He isn’t just waiting for Moscow to fall.

    Similar with Calcutta, although oob sbr rules make a fighter purchase uk1 a must Imo. I cannot agree with that aspect of ghg’s strategy.

  • '18 '17 '16

    Actually I’ve never had to land a fighter on Moscow to this point. The Germans haven’t gotten close enough for me to have to do that. I am aware of that strategy though and I’m sure that some day I will have to use it if things don’t go well for Russia. Sending mechs and tanks into the Eastern Front is usually enough to stop the Germans and Italians. It’s surprising how easy it is to do the reverse can opener against them in Bessarabia and bust into the Balkans or Romania. With Russia able to build in the Ukraine, it’s a lot easier than having to march units from Berlin or Northern Italy.

  • '17 '16 Customizer

    I think its important to try new things, im always doing crazy stuff, and you know what, you learn. My group used to always criticize me for my tactics… “your doing that, you should do this”… “you throwing the game”… Now, those same people don’t say anything, they listen/watch as I win 90% of the time playing 1 on 1. I find myself now battling against my strategies I used on them, when before they would basically do a grasshopper video…

    I have no problems winning as axis, and I have no problems winning as allied… naturally you lose some, but I don’t feel the bid is necessary with experienced players, our group plays every week (our group consists of 21, 7 regulars), sometimes 2-3 a week, for the past year, we have a lot of time in. Ive personally worked a long time on debugging the current strategies out there, which ill go over when I do my own videos.

    I even used to give the Allies the +30 IPCs, but I don’t anymore, we don’t need it… we are a lethal bunch

    Point is, you have to try new ideas to discover new ideas. My UK strategy is 100% different then this, and mine kicks ass too, there are many ways to win this game… and many ways to lose it… always try new ideas, you will become a better player.

    You keep doing what your doing GHG!

  • '17 '16 '13 '12

    @GeneralHandGrenade:

    Actually I’ve never had to land a fighter on Moscow to this point. The Germans haven’t gotten close enough for me to have to do that. I am aware of that strategy though and I’m sure that some day I will have to use it if things don’t go well for Russia. Sending mechs and tanks into the Eastern Front is usually enough to stop the Germans and Italians. It’s surprising how easy it is to do the reverse can opener against them in Bessarabia and bust into the Balkans or Romania. With Russia able to build in the Ukraine, it’s a lot easier than having to march units from Berlin or Northern Italy.

    OK…

  • '18 '17 '16

    This has been a very engaging thread. I like the general idea of U.K. Factories in the Middle East and have used them to varying degrees in past games.

    As others have said, it really depends on what Germany does with regards to Sea Lion. Russia alone cannot stop a strong German player.

    I’ve seen many strong players build transports and aircraft carrier for Germany to threaten sea lion and force U.K. defensive builds at home and take resources away from the Mid East, only to turn north around Scandinavia and use the fleet to crush Leningrad.

    I have to agree with most of what Tamvan has said. While I’ve never played him, I know others that have. He is one of the best players on this forum.

  • '17

    @GeneralHandGrenade:

    It’s surprising how easy it is to do the reverse can opener against them in Bessarabia and bust into the Balkans or Romania. With Russia able to build in the Ukraine, it’s a lot easier than having to march units from Berlin or Northern Italy.

    GHG,

    I was the person who responded about Italy taking Cairo. Anyways, I have to respectfully disagree with your philosophy here. Italy can make a play towards Alexandria with 6 ground and 2 more ground using the transport from SZ 95. Then if the UK all but abandons Cairo as suggested, Italy can hit it with a substantial amount of forces. On G3, Germany could reinforce with 4-5 planes and keep reinforcing as long as it takes for Italy to seriously make a play to hold it. Italy can have a substantial amount of forces there compared to the UK if playing straight up OOB setup. The UK will most likely get Cairo back, but it may not be for a long time which means less stuff going towards helping out Russia. I’d rather have the Italian units stranded in the middle of North Africa not really threatening anything than sitting on Cairo; that way the UK is dictating the ground unit fight, not the other way around.

    In regards to your quote, reading that makes me think you haven’t played very many solid Axis players. Against solid axis players the UK will have to reinforce Russia with fighters and units into the Caucasus, but that’s about as far as any UK units get. UK units are not getting to Bessarabia to can open. Basing your views off of anything else means to me you haven’t been challenged as stated above. Regarding your initial strategy, I agree with activating Persia UK1 in order to beef up the middle east. But in the triplea community, Sea Lion has once again become very popular as a way to prevent the UK from building on middle east minor ICs. Axis players are really tired of stacks of UK fighters and other ground coming up into the Caucasus. Recently when playing the UK, I purchased 6 infantry/1fighter for London and Germany still pulled off Sea Lion and held off Russia very well. Axis won the game against me and a much better teammate. In the games I’ve played, on triplea or table top, in most of them Germany pushes the allies back to Moscow and or the 3 territories north and south of Moscow. Moscow regularly falls more than 50% of the games even with UK planes. I know I’m not the best player. I will respect your opinion to differ. I have played about 10 table top games (1940 and 1942 setup) and I’ve played about 75 games on triplea (which is different in that it’s electronic and you use a battle calc). So, I do have a little experience to base my viewpoints on. I may not have the time to watch your video or count exactly which pieces are where and state exactly how many pieces are purchased by Germany on Turn 4…ect. In most games I’ve played with solid players, the Axis dictate the scenarios and the allies respond. In most games, it’s not really until turns 5-6 that the allies can really influence an axis response. That’s why it’s not necessary to really get into too many specifics in this dynamic game where one game to the next completely plays out differently. Chess is setup the same, but is completely different on the board 5-6 moves in.

    Having said that, I would say that any criticisms from say Taamvan would hold more weight than most in the forum. He and his team won the GENCON tournament for 2016. Also, I trust criticisms from Arthur Bomber Harris (if he joins the conversation) as he beat me with a bid of 30 IPCs and Siparo who is now 2-0 against me table top! I need to step up my game!

    Ichabod

  • '17

    @siparo:

    This has been a very engaging thread. I like the general idea of U.K. Factories in the Middle East and have used them to varying degrees in past games.

    As others have said, it really depends on what Germany does with regards to Sea Lion. Russia alone cannot stop a strong German player.

    Siparo,

    In the 2 table top games we played…obviously my demonstrations made me out to not be the “strong German player.” I hope that in a future game I could provide a better demonstration and maybe earn some Axis and Allies “skill” respect for whatever country I end up playing. I’m still disappointed about my Noob move of exposing my stack to a nice Russian counter attack at Bryansk when I could have stacked at Smolensk and most likely captured Moscow the following turn. I think the G42 rules about collecting the most IPCs at the end of turn 7 influenced my decision thinking too much.

    Good job hosting that Nashville event…fun playing the guessing game too!

    Ichabod


  • I actually played the Allies yesterday in a game. I have to be honest that I stopped playing AAG 40 after HBG global 39 and 36 came out. Recently I found players who play strictly AAG 40 OOB rules. I usually do the Middle Earth “cute name” but mine is a tad different, one mistake and and this plan falters…one distraction and it falters…I also turtled with Russia and agree it is not viable move

  • '17

    @Ichabod:

    Siparo,

    In the 2 table top games we played…obviously my demonstrations made me out to not be the “strong German player.” I hope that in a future game I could provide a better demonstration and maybe earn some Axis and Allies “skill” respect for whatever country I end up playing. I’m still disappointed about my Noob move of exposing my stack to a nice Russian counter attack at Bryansk when I could have stacked at Smolensk and most likely captured Moscow the following turn. I think the G42 rules about collecting the most IPCs at the end of turn 7 influenced my decision thinking too much.

    Good job hosting that Nashville event…fun playing the guessing game too!

    Ichabod

    :evil:

  • '18 '17 '16

    @ Ichabod- My apologies for getting it wrong who I was responding to last time. There were many responses that first day and I got that one wrong. As for Cairo, all I can suggest is try it sometime. I read a lot of people replying to this thread with their opinions and I value all of them, but nobody has taken the time to test out what I’m saying. Some of the things that work best for me are things that I stumble on almost by accident. I can’t remember why or how I gave up Cairo so easily the first time but it surprised me how easy it was to get it back and thus eliminating almost all of the Italian troops in one move. It’s very rare that they have a transport after the first turn so at most they will only put 2 units in Africa and that’s only if they don’t decide to put them in Gibraltar or Greece or an island. I make a point of taking away their ability to transport troops on the first and second turns. If you wipe out Cairo on the third turn then they will only have the 2 units from Libya and the dude from Somaliland. That’s it. With your factories in Persia and SA and your transport capacity you make very short work of the Axis in Africa. The only way this doesn’t happen in my games is when Germany puts boats in the Med and that means they’ve taken units away from Russia and delay it for a few turns. Don’t take my word for it though, just give it a try.

  • '21 '20 '18 '17

    In our most recent game of G40, my partner Germany did a 100% sea lion build (hes a new player, just learning, wanted to experiment with this).

    In response, UK 1-3, was only able to build the following on 3 successive turns on South Africa

    1 arty
    2 mechs
    1 armor

    This is $18 of approx. $84 dollars available on those turns, demonstrating that only 20% of funds are available to wisely distribute around the world, when you are turtling London against the largest possible German commit (8+ TTs!)

    We lost, since Russia raged, but it was still fun.

  • '17

    @GeneralHandGrenade:

    As for Cairo, all I can suggest is try it sometime. I read a lot of people replying to this thread with their opinions and I value all of them, but nobody has taken the time to test out what I’m saying. I can’t remember why or how I gave up Cairo so easily the first time but it surprised me how easy it was to get it back and thus eliminating almost all of the Italian troops in one move. � Don’t take my word for it though, just give it a try.

    GHG,

    My opinions are based upon game time experiences and less theorizing. I lose more games than I win…so my “points of view” aren’t as credible as others. And remember, this dynamic game is so fun for us that even discussing strategy is enjoyable. �

    Cairo Debate: I remember once I made a very credible threat towards getting Cairo. I was stacked on Alexandria and the UK player evacuated Cairo the next turn. The UK player was able to get lots of stuff in position to where in the subsequent turn if I as the Axis tried to stack on Cairo, I could have ended up losing everything to include German planes. I happened to see it and therefore did not fall into that trap. Just because you give up Cairo, doesn’t mean the Axis player is going to hand to you on a silver platter all of their forces to be lost in one lone battle. The scenario described to me, “thus eliminating almost all Italian troops in one move” is not going to regularly occur against most Axis players a second time. You also mention about getting all of the way to Bessarabia with UK units and Moscow never falling. In my game experience, these are rare occurrences, and at that point, the allies already won.

    When putting your strategy on the forum, I think anyone should take for granted that everyone else may not have the time nor opportunity to spend a 10-14 game just to test out someone else’s strategy to find flaws. Honestly, I get to play 1 table top game maybe once every 2-3 months. I’m going to play the strategies I think work best for me. And besides, it’s your strategy, how could I say I really played your strategy correctly? You said that sometimes you stumble upon things and learned a new strategy. Regarding Cairo, I don’t think you can count on getting the Italian units in one fell swoop game after game.

    In the few games I lost Cairo, I usually got it back (in 1 game I didn’t which I lost). It slowed me down from “beefing” up “middle earth” and therefore helping Russia. I haven’t seen a value in losing Cairo let alone evacuating just for the sake of enticing some counter attack kills.

    I can assure you, if I get both London and Cairo, I will most likely win, especially if you gave up Cairo the turn prior to a successful Sea Lion attack.

    Now I’m theorizing…
    Lets assume that my G1 purchase is 2 bombers and 1 sub (I do that purchase occasionally). I’m left with a dented battleship in SZ 110, and 1 sub in SZ 111. UK did not scramble any battles. Germany won a 50/50 battle in SZ 106 and therefore took out that extra transport from Canada. I’m not doing a J1 attack (not a fan cause it can take Sea Lion off the table). This is a likely scenario. What are you going to purchase UK1 and where is it going? Are you going to start purchasing on SA or a naval base?

  • '17

    @taamvan:

    In our most recent game of G40, my partner Germany did a 100% sea lion build (hes a new player, just learning, wanted to experiment with this).

    In response, UK 1-3, was only able to build the following on 3 successive turns on South Africa

    1 arty
    2 mechs
    1 armor

    This is $18 of approx. $84 dollars available on those turns, demonstrating that only 20% of funds are available to wisely distribute around the world, when you are turtling London against the largest possible German commit (8+ TTs!)

    We lost, since Russia raged, but it was still fun.

    Did your Axis partner DOW on Russia prior to Sea Lion in order to occupy E. Poland? How soon or where did Russia stack in order to really threaten Germany?

  • '18 '17 '16

    I purchase 6 infantry and a fighter every single game as a UK player regardless of what Germany does. At some point during the game Germany will be tempted to look across the channel so I need to at least make sure that London is not an easy target if not have to defend it. On UK 2 I purchase the IC for Persia and the naval base if Germany doesn’t purchase what they need to do Sealion. That leaves 10 IPC’s that I use to purchase another fighter. If UK doesn’t have at least 3 fighters by the end of UK 2 then that’s where I place it. If they do then I place it in SA. Depending on what is going on the naval base doesn’t need to be purchased until the third turn. If Germany’s purchases give a small chance of Sealion then you can put up to 5 more infantry on London. If UK lost too much of their air power in Taranto you can place 2 more units on SA, one of which is a plane.

    There is no UK strategy that is effective if you lose London.

  • '17

    GHG,

    My preference is to play global via table top. But being a father with a 14 month old son and a husband to my wonderful wife, I can’t justify dedicating a 12-14 hour Saturday more than 1x per 2-3 months. Playing a few hours of triplea in the evening after my son is put to bed is sometimes the only way I can play. Yes, triplea isn’t the same, but it’s a good electronic version.

    Amongst the triplea global 40 regulars, Sea Lion has recently become very popular again. A few months ago, I started a post called “Tan Skies” (meaning large stacks of UK fighters getting to Moscow being a problem for Germany). Players are really tired of aggressive UK strategies like your plan and lately seem to be testing the limitations of Sea Lion again. An opponent recently pulled off Sea Lion against me and it wasn’t pyrrhic (he only had to take like 2 plane hits). He declared war on Russia G2 in order to snatch E. Poland. This was easy because he positioned his ground on G1 like he was going to do Barbarossa but his forces were evenly positioned from Romania on up to Poland so the Russian player couldn’t tell if he was going to go north or south of the Pripet marshes. Grabbing E. Poland on G2 really puts Russia out of position for subsequent threats of Germany and helps to block Russia from immediately getting lots of NO bonuses. I was shocked when he bought a ton of transports G2 even though I placed the “responsible” 6 infantry / 1 fighter on London. His reasoning for still doing Sea Lion despite 6 inf/1 fig was that the US was setting itself up for a KJF strategy and he needed to slow them down. The US navy was in wrong place to where they couldn’t immediately move any ships to New Brunswick. His G1 purchase I think was 1 bomber, 1 sub, 4 infantry. The axis won this game.

    Until this game, it hadn’t really occurred to me that 8 infantry / 1 artillery is a better defensive purchase. Duh… We buy the 6/1 so we get 1 useful fighter. If Germany purchases 1 transport on G1, I’m now more inclined to purchase 8 infantry/ 1 artillery for London against good opponents. I’ll still buy 6 infantry / 1 fighter if a German opponent purchased like described above. But it was rather shocking.

Suggested Topics

  • 15
  • 50
  • 15
  • 2
  • 6
  • 10
  • 12
  • 2
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

32

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts