Has anyone tried a German fighter bid?


  • @Bunnies:

    @hyogoetophile:

    Bunnies, I think the phrase you were grasping for was “the elephant in the room.”

    Yes, everyone can see Aloysius Snuffleupagus these days.  I suppose Big Bird must have started passing around the hooch.

    Thanx, hyogoetophile.

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Sending in also the tank? It will be in danger and out of reach of Ukraine. But it is possible.

    Sending the tnak increases win% to 89% (with 2,86 units left on average) and still leaves 1 fig in Karelia. It is better then the 60% but I still prefer to attack West Russia/Belorussia.


  • @Romulus:

    @Bunnies:

    @hyogoetophile:

    Bunnies, I think the phrase you were grasping for was “the elephant in the room.”

    Yes, everyone can see Aloysius Snuffleupagus these days.  I suppose Big Bird must have started passing around the hooch.

    Thanx, hyogoetophile.

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Sending in also the tank? It will be in danger and out of reach of Ukraine. But it is possible.

    Sending the tnak increases win% to 89% (with 2,86 units left on average) and still leaves 1 fig in Karelia. It is better then the 60% but I still prefer to attack West Russia/Belorussia.

    Under most circumstances, barring some really game-changing house rules &c:

    Russia losing fighter on G1 = stupid as h***.

    If you’ve got anything approaching a normal game, it’s not even worth discussing a strategy that ends up with Russia losing a fighter on G1 with 90+% probability, and parking the Russian fighter at Karelia on R1 is a great way to do just that.

    WHY:

    1.  Russia fighter’s good for trading territory.  Also good on defense.  Also good at forcing Germans to keep battleship escort for the Med transport (what, you just want a rogue German battleship cruising around looking for trouble?)

    2.  Russia can’t really afford to buy another fighter at the beginning of the game.  One fighter?  Three infantry?  Hm.  One can soak up 3 hits, attacks worth 3, defends worth 6.  Another can soak up 1 hit, attacks worth 3, defends worth 4.  What should I do.  Or I can get 2 tanks, which can soak up 2 hits, attack at 6, defend at 6.  O ya, let me go buy a FIGHTER HAHAHAHA no wait, a BOMBER, no a BATTLESHIP HAHAHAHA.  No, really, you CAN buy that stuff for Russia after you’ve won for all practical purposes, but if the game result is still in question, you probably ain’t gettin another fighter.


  • What I can say? I completely agree!!!


  • @AxisOfEvil:

    PS - i retook caucus round 5  and germany was very weak in unit strength.

    bah, cmon, you took it back only because Japan player refused reinforce it with 9 tanks and fighters. There was no way you retook it if he did reinforce. Can’t do more than that if im also playing against Japan. Not the thread to debate this anyways, we will do it in game.

    I still would consider a plane bid to sink another UK BB round 1. It has the advantage if surviving of not getting wasted after the attack like surviving subs are wasted by american planes.

    For Russia, i been seen buying a bomber for Russia every now and then on 2nd turn depending on how Germany forces are looking. A third plane make its way easier to swap the 3 territories with minimum infantry. The bomber range also enable to  trade territories in the Far east or bomb thoses Japan complexes if it has nothing better to do. In 4 turns, if japan went IC, i normally do get a good 30 ipc out of japan hands when i combine the 2 allied bombers for the effect. If they did not, thoses bombers forces Japan to escort their transports and can help with ground operations.


  • @Corbeau:

    For Russia, i been seen buying a bomber for Russia every now and then on 2nd turn depending on how Germany forces are looking.

    You sure are brave to admit to buying a Russian Bomber on r2 in this forum. I am going to duck now, as you might take some abuse!!!

    But in all honesty, i can and have bought a third russian fighter in say round 6-7. I buy it if russia is doing well in land piece count. At this point in the game, you will have germans staged to the west, and japanese staged to the east. You end up swapping novo, kazah, and western front territories with these forces. that can be 4 -6 territories you have to swap per turn. An extra fighter certainly helps at this time.  And it helps in the ultimate defense of Moscow.


  • :-o
    Russian bomber!!!
    May as well go tech and get heavy bombers too! Deal out some real damage, to yourself :roll:
    If you think you can win with Russia giving up 3 tanks=9 attack/defence points, or 5 infantry=5 attack points/10 defence points for 1 Bomber=4 attack points/1 defence point! Then I want to play you. I could use an easy win for a change.
    Now go look in the mirror, and say to yourself, stupid stupid stupid, and slap yourself silly. And promise yourself you will never post again when you are drunk. If I had my way, Russian bombers would not even be on the units list. same goes for Russian Battleships. OK, don’t anyone confess that they have ever built a Russian Battleship or I’ll come over there and slap you myself!
    :-o 8-)


  • I did say round TWO and depending how Germany is looking.
    Things to consider:

    • Did G1 buy an AC or tranport in baltic ( thats 16 ipc )
    • Are UK in position to reinforce Karelia
    • Do i have a stable enough front

    Also, it may seem a lot but each time i spare one infantry swapping territory, it’s a +3 ipc. A bomber does imply most of the time sending one less infantry. After 3 round, i did spared 9 ipcs in infantry.

    Note: I don’t play low luck, so high dice value counts for a lot.

    Yes Russia doing only infantry is what everyone does ( And i do when the situation calls for it) but you can adapt a game to what is happening. Another exemple of seemingly too pricy expense: if mediteranee is holded by allied boats, there is nothing against building 1-2 russian transports to ferry troops in south Italy or the balkans.

    I did not yet build a russian battleship but eh, i might do it if i am playing you, if only to give you a chance ;)


  • :-o
    OMG!
    Is this a challange :?
    I only play on the tripleA site.
    Bring it on Bomber boy. :-P

    ……LOL…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…


  • Did you not know that a battleship buy on R1 is the best Russian move in the game. It’s totally broken. Those germans sure will have egg on their faces when you start bombarding Berlin  :-D


  • @Bunnies:

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Yes, I was advocating 3 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig. You have to be careful if Germany has a good first roll, otherwise the fighter is at risk. The odds are long…but I like 'em better than 3 naked tanks in the Ukraine!

    Three games now, and in two I have ended with 1 Arm, 1 Fig remaining in NOR, and one saw 1 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig survive.

    That armor is safe unless Germany wants to waste needed infantry against a UK counter, and it can be used on the following turn to retake Karelia, or wait until Inf/Figs do the job and blitz it back to Archangel. Also, provided that Russia and UK know their stuff, Germany will NEVER get that money back unless they do the turn 1 counter, and follow it up with Baltic fleet investment, which is not always feasible. A (semi)-permanent 6 IPC shift in favor of the Allies before the Axis even get a turn is worth the longer odds, IMHO.

    @Romulus:

    Moreover, I do not see NOR as an Easier attack, I used TripleA battle calculator with 10000 runs and odds are:

    NOR: 3 inf 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 fig -> 60% propability of winning (with 1,36 units left….)
    UKR: 3 inf 1 art 3 tank 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 fig -> 96% probability of winning (with 4,84 units left)

    It seems to me that UKR is far better as attack

    But what is the goal? If the goal is simply the destruction of any and all German forces, then perhaps UKR is better, but if the goal is the destruction of a German fighter…

    Norway attempts this while putting only 1/4 of Russias starting tank force at some risk.

    Ukraine attempts this while sacrificing 3/4 of Russias starting tank force, along with half the artillery…and this is if the attack goes well!

    I’m not saying that a strafe of the Ukraine isn’t a viable option, but after seeing how advantageous a successful Norway attack can be in my last three games, I don’t think I’ll bother trying to take and hold Ukraine ever again. It costs too much for too little gain.


  • @Aretaku:

    @Bunnies:

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Yes, I was advocating 3 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig.

    Yeah these here beer goggles make some things seem BIGGER and some things seem SMALLER.  heheehe.  3 inf, 1 arm, 1 fighter, I knew it.  Somehow I typed “2” instead.  wups.

    You have to be careful if Germany has a good first roll, otherwise the fighter is at risk. The odds are long…but I like 'em better than 3 naked tanks in the Ukraine!

    I usually do West Russia/Belorussia or two-tank Ukraine if I’m feeling randy.  Which I mostly am.  naked tanks.  yeah baby.

    Three games now, and in two I have ended with 1 Arm, 1 Fig remaining in NOR, and one saw 1 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig survive.

    The reason I don’t like doing Norway is I prefer brunettes.  But also I don’t like seeing German-held Ukraine and Belorussia on G1; that can end in a nasty early position for Russia if Germany decides to attack with air force and sometimes its Med transport.  The Germans have SIX fodder infantry, that’s a lot.

    That armor is safe unless Germany wants to waste needed infantry against a UK counter, and it can be used on the following turn to retake Karelia, or wait until Inf/Figs do the job and blitz it back to Archangel. Also, provided that Russia and UK know their stuff, Germany will NEVER get that money back unless they do the turn 1 counter, and follow it up with Baltic fleet investment, which is not always feasible. A (semi)-permanent 6 IPC shift in favor of the Allies before the Axis even get a turn is worth the longer odds, IMHO.

    I knew it, ur a ho!  don’t touch me!  no wait, baby . . . yeah . . . u know i can’t stay mad at u . . . yeah, it is a pretty attractive gain . . . are u sayin i’m fat?  er no baby . . . anyways

    I think that although a R1 Norway attack offers decent odds and a gain, the risk of G1 kitchen sink attack is just not something I like to deal with.  Then again, I’m pretty confident in my Allied game.

    @Romulus:

    Moreover, I do not see NOR as an Easier attack, I used TripleA battle calculator with 10000 runs and odds are:

    NOR: 3 inf 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 fig -> 60% propability of winning (with 1,36 units left….)
    UKR: 3 inf 1 art 3 tank 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 fig -> 96% probability of winning (with 4,84 units left)

    It seems to me that UKR is far better as attack

    But what is the goal? If the goal is simply the destruction of any and all German forces, then perhaps UKR is better,

    Precisely.  Killing Ukr on R1 depletes a German artillery, a German tank, and a German fighter.  Plus assorted infantry.  That’s hawt.

    but if the goal is the destruction of a German fighter…

    Norway attempts this while putting only 1/4 of Russias starting tank force at some risk.

    Ukraine attempts this while sacrificing 3/4 of Russias starting tank force, along with half the artillery…and this is if the attack goes well!

    I’m not saying that a strafe of the Ukraine isn’t a viable option, but after seeing how advantageous a successful Norway attack can be in my last three games, I don’t think I’ll bother trying to take and hold Ukraine ever again. It costs too much for too little gain.

    Your overconfidence is your weakness.  What happens when you fail at Norway and Germany counters hard?

    Your faith in your friends is yours.  beer never fails me


  • Ok, ok, I know, I would like to write 3 inf.

    I see, sending the tank instead of the Moscow fighter. Still win% stay at 60%, too low IMHO.

    Tank in NOR is out of danger if UK is able to strike in NOR on UK1. If UK do not attack baltic fleet on UK1, I can not see the UK landing in NOR.

    Indeed the Tank is still out of reach of UKR on R2 and I do not like that.


  • @Crazy:

    Now go look in the mirror, and say to yourself, stupid stupid stupid, and slap yourself silly. And promise yourself you will never post again when you are drunk.

    I used to do that, until I found Jesus.


  • @Crazy:

    :-o
    OMG!
    Is this a challange :?
    I only play on the tripleA site.
    Bring it on Bomber boy. :-P

    ……LOL…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…

    I’ll be online tripleA game lobby tonight under same name. Thas’ if Axis or Mazer don’t challenge me before, they were already in queue.

  • '19 Moderator

    @Bunnies:

    @Crazy:

    Now go look in the mirror, and say to yourself, stupid stupid stupid, and slap yourself silly. And promise yourself you will never post again when you are drunk.

    I used to do that, until I found Jesus.

    When you found him was he mowing your lawn?

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Don’t have time to read every post, apologies, so if this is a repeat ignore it, but wouldnt 2 Infnatry, Artillery in Ukraine effectively net you a fighter anyway, since odds of Russia even bothering to attack Ukraine are now effectively nil?

    And yes, I agree, a large German Luftwaffe can be a serious pain in the butt.  Especially when you have 7 fighters, 3 bombers flying around.


  • If you can add several bid units to same area, then yes - 2inf 1arty in Ukraine are way better than 1 fighter there.
    And even if not, 2inf 1arty can help several theaters - like arty Libya, inf Ukraine, inf Belorus (or EEu).

Suggested Topics

  • 11
  • 20
  • 14
  • 8
  • 16
  • 4
  • 42
  • 32
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

30

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts