Ok I have a more clear Strategic view for defensive planning. There are some decision that have to be pre-planned and executed when those situation occur. We may call these long term planning: The players define a general policies for events he forecasts that and pre-define a reaction to that.
Going further in details we can consider what Frood and U-505 said.
We may thing to the short term planning as an analysis of owned territory. I like the idea of having an order: Capital, territories in descending order of strategic value.
Defending Capitals with owhervelming forces is the first point: stack there as much units it is possible.
For the other territories then the analysis is related to die points.
If we consider a territory we want to defend, in which there are fighters we do not want to lose, which is a good margin in die points?
I mean, skew is dangerous for defender more than for attackers, at least it seems to me that way.
I usually feel myself “safe” when my die points give to me a margin of at lest 3 defensive hits (rounded down).
Is it too much? Is it too few?
P.S. Frood you get the points! In TripleA there could be long term planning routines and short term planning routines!
Only thing I would add would be a clarification to your post Romulus…
Capital Defense is not ALWAYS #1 priority.
If your capital is not under threat, then why defend it? Germany is often safe early in the war, allowing Germany to shove forces to the front. The same is true of Russia early.
You just have to keep a very close watch on actual and potential enemy movements so that in 2 or 3 turns when your Capital IS under threat that you have adequate forces in range to move to defend it.
Ok, Switch, I understood your clarification. I made a statement that it is not always true. Sometime it is sufficient to check for danger and be sure to have defending forces nearby.
Indeed, it is always a planning resoning, and is what I am looking for! Your precisation make the analysis more clear!
@ncscswitch:
Only thing I would add would be a clarification to your post Romulus…
Capital Defense is not ALWAYS #1 priority.
If your capital is not under threat, then why defend it? Germany is often safe early in the war, allowing Germany to shove forces to the front. The same is true of Russia early.
You just have to keep a very close watch on actual and potential enemy movements so that in 2 or 3 turns when your Capital IS under threat that you have adequate forces in range to move to defend it.
This is what I call overview, or visual “intelligence”.
We have all been newbs sometime, right?
Now it’s routine for me to check the BC each round when I’m on the axis side. What can hit Berlin?
Sometimes US trades SE, but if both UK+US stands in WE, then this is a 2 punch calculation.
And if Germany does not get this right, then the game is lost beacuse of this.
This issue is crucial if Jap got about 50% for Moscow, and gains each rnd, stacking novo.
holding cap for 1 more rnd can win the game….
This is why some TT’s are much more important than others. It’s actually cheaper to do bad TUV trades with G and J, for Russia,
if this means Russia have at least 1 inf on every TT outside Moscow. Or else Moscow may have to be stacked big time including
UK/US fighters which could be used elsewhere.
Ok, Switch, I understood your clarification. I made a statement that it is not always true. Sometime it is sufficient to check for danger and be sure to have defending forces nearby.
Indeed, it is always a planning resoning, and is what I am looking for! Your precisation make the analysis more clear!
With a good sense for “overview” it makes it more easy to make good plans.
This is better in tripleA for me, at least I’m more used the screen than the board.
Sometimes losing your capitol is irrellevant to the need to destroy the armies of your enemy too.
For instance, if you can hit Germany hard with Russian forces making it impossible to defend when England goes, who cares if Japan takes Moscow? England’s now ready to pump out 10 tanks a round and, hopefully, you have America set up with S. and W. Europe so they can put out 12 tanks a round. (IC in W. Europe, duh.) THat’s 22 tanks vs 8 of whatever Japan’s building in Moscow.
Sometimes losing your capitol is irrellevant to the need to destroy the armies of your enemy too.
You should say:
Sometimes losing Russian capital is irrellevant to the need to destroy the armies of your enemy too!!! :evil:
It is the only case I am able to think of a capital fall without problem! I any other case it is always top priority to defend the capital.
:-D
Germany can fall.
If you take out Russia strong and have most of the German army left (because you pushed forward and you have a lot of your armor and fighters left) you can push back and reclaim Berlin without too much trouble.
Germany can fall.
If you take out Russia strong and have most of the German army left (because you pushed forward and you have a lot of your armor and fighters left) you can push back and reclaim Berlin without too much trouble.
The Allied landing force in Berlin and the 16 Allied units being produced at Germany/Southern Europe might have something to say about that.
I have never seen Germany recapture Berlin once it falls.
Really? What if Germany has 15 fighters and 30 armor left when Berlin falls?
What if it all falls to England and America has to shuttle troops? England cannot build 16 units a round in Europe, not if they want any punch at all, and odds are, they have none left after taking Germany.
Really? What if Germany has 15 fighters and 30 armor left when Berlin falls?
What if it all falls to England and America has to shuttle troops? England cannot build 16 units a round in Europe, not if they want any punch at all, and odds are, they have none left after taking Germany.
I cannot rememer ever that I saw or played a game where Germany could take back its capital after losing it to either
UK or US. If Both SE and Berlin falls to UK, then UK must also have WE, and most other TT’s which are worth
any ipc value, if not then this is bad planning. Best option is US have Berlin and UK SE+WE.
But also US have SE and UK WE+Berlin works fine usually.
Germany can fall.
If you take out Russia strong and have most of the German army left (because you pushed forward and you have a lot of your armor and fighters left) you can push back and reclaim Berlin without too much trouble.
The Allied landing force in Berlin and the 16 Allied units being produced at Germany/Southern Europe might have something to say about that.
I have never seen Germany recapture Berlin once it falls.
Strongly agree.
You will never seen it also in the future!
Berlin fall when Germany exhausted all resources, when the last German defense is overcame, not before when Wehrmacht is still strong.
Really? What if Germany has 15 fighters and 30 armor left when Berlin falls?
What if it all falls to England and America has to shuttle troops? England cannot build 16 units a round in Europe, not if they want any punch at all, and odds are, they have none left after taking Germany.
This example is a pure hypothetical scenario.
No German player may lose Germany having still 15 fighter and 30 armor.
He should have at least a comparable force to defende Berlin, in which case allied have a juggernaut force to accomplish Berlin conquest.
Or he should have leaved Berlin almost empty to be taken by the allied, in which case he deserve to be expelled by the game (having lost the capitol those nation may be out of play).
Check my game with AJ
I needed my equipment to pulverise the Russian/British/American defense and now have a 200 IPC army with Berlin in British hands. The Japanese have a 300 IPC army and the British and Americans each have about 150 IPC
I do not know the detail of your game, and I am not referring to a game in particular.
I am speaking generally.
Maybe in your case you having made all the necessary evaluation have decided for such move, basing on the game specific situation.
Moreover, coming back on topic.
How do you manage to plan such a move?
How do you evaluate the situation?
I mean, in chess there is a particular combinatin of move, that is started with the sacrifice of a own piece to force the enemy in a series of forced move or oputting him in a bad position, in order to chekmate the enemy King.
In A&A I may think of an analogy with chess.
But in this case is the Germany that place herself in a “bad position” (state on the board) and is forced to commit her forces in a series of forced move, losing unit that cannot be replaced, being Germany not allowed to buy.
I do not think that is a good example for correct planning.
It is a speculative case.
You have experienced it in a game but the result is still to be achieved.
The trick, I think, is planning what the allied nations are going to do in support of what you want to do.
Hopefully in the loss of Berlin/Capture of Moscow my ally the Japanese can support me in reclaiming Berlin, which shouldn’t be hard, just costly.
Likewise, you need to always to endeavor to make your nations work together in harmony to wring destruction and pain on your targets.
Also, focus on a goal, not on peripherals. The devil is in the details, best to leave him there.
Ok.
My question in this thread has been which kind of evaluation must make in order to plan defensive strategies, tactics and movements.
IT seems to me that planning offensive moves is more analyzed than planning defensive ones. Moreover it is more simpel to me planning to attack than organize a correct defense. As I said I often end employng in defense more units than needed. So I am trying to improve this part of my gameplay.
I mean defense is often made basing on overall strategy.
Other evalution are made considering each territory, starting from the Capital, and continuing with the list of the remaining territories.
However, capital ha to be considered in first place only if it is in danger, otherwise garrisono units may be sent to the front.
Your analisys added another pint of view.
Possibilities or necessity of offensive movements may overcome defending needs, to the point that leaving a Capiton open is a viable option.
How to identify such situation?
