@Stough @mainah @Aaron_the_Warmonger
Guys, I have moved your game appointment to the “Find Online Players” category, as this was off-topic in the previous thread.
Enjoy your game :slightly_smiling_face:
Alpha +3 = UK1 Factory in EGY breaks the game?
-
Well here’s a better one for you…
Build a transport SAF Uk1, you can certainly afford to spend the 7 IPC’s there.
Get your other transport out of the med, and within range of SAF, then start shucking 3 units a turn, using your naval bases and ANOTHER transport UK 2 or 3, or 4. from SAF to EGY.
How’s that?
If Germany goes hard Sea Lion, you sit on your hands for a turn or two and do a typical defense.
-
Not bad, I’d buy the transport UK1 and still buy the IC on UK2, or maybe UK3 now that I could move something like 6 units a turn from SA to Egypt
-
Well, with a transport you are still limited to 3 units a round. With a complex you are up to 6 (S. Afr +3, Egypt +3). I do like one in C. Persia however, and it is far safer from the Italians than Egypt. Granted, Egypt is a stronger position to deny them objectives.
-
Sounds like the best way to get the British into the game early. Everything goes to airpower/navy gearing up for a Norway/Normandy landings UK 4/5/6 etc.
-
Personally even with the 4 AA, I’d still go 6 Infantry/Fighter UK1. Lock it down, start to get the jump on Atlantic/Med air supremacy.
An IC elsewhere (Egypt/C Persia/Iraq) can wait til UK 2 and observation of German/Italian response.
-
Sounds like the best way to get the British into the game early. Everything goes to airpower/navy gearing up for a Norway/Normandy landings UK 4/5/6 etc.
Repeat of history: Hit in the Axis soft belly!
-
I think that a Factory for U.K.1 in Egypt is a good bet especially if Germany doesnt look like its going to commit to a sea lion, I know that Round 1 is still to early to tell what their going to do. Thats why I would try it about 50% of the time, I would also want to see how the dice are treating me and what Germany did on their opener.
I have not played the U.K. much in our 30 or so ALPHA+2 games maybe 5 or 6 times and I know that 2 times I did purchase a Factory on 1 and put in Egypt and the Allies won those games. I also have seen where Italy has taken the Factory in Egypt and in the last 12 to 15 games the U.K. has moved away from that strat. I would try it a few times unless I see Germany sending planes down to S. Italy or Libya or in a later round build Naval units in the med ( S. France) or a Minor Factory that borders on the Med.
Start a new thread that say’s tried it and made it or tried it and didnt make it
MY FACTORY IN EGYPT -
IMO I think a UK1 Egypt factory is too risky. If Germany is on the ball London will fall G3, and that means you only get one build out of Egypt. You might get liberated in a couple of turns but by that time you have probally built Italy a factory in egypt.
-
I’ve been thinking about it and I think that since a minor IC is only 12IPCs it might be better to place it on UK1. Britian has a bit more flexability with its starting economy, so it could probably afford to spend the 12 IPC on the IC in Egypt, if it spends the rest of its economy on defense in London
-
I’ve been thinking about it and I think that since a minor IC is only 12IPCs it might be better to place it on UK1. Britian has a bit more flexability with its starting economy, so it could probably afford to spend the 12 IPC on the IC in Egypt, if it spends the rest of its economy on defense in London
By not using the extra aa units in uk to prepare your defences, you actually are reverting back to alpha 2 defences for sealion. Actually they are worse because the aa guns don’t get a roll on defence.
4 less infantry =1 ic. Wich means 4 less 2 s on defence -
I’ve been thinking about it and I think that since a minor IC is only 12IPCs it might be better to place it on UK1. Britian has a bit more flexability with its starting economy, so it could probably afford to spend the 12 IPC on the IC in Egypt, if it spends the rest of its economy on defense in London
By not using the extra aa units in uk to prepare your defences, you actually are reverting back to alpha 2 defences for sealion. Actually they are worse because the aa guns don’t get a roll on defence.
4 less infantry =1 ic. Wich means 4 less 2 s on defenceAgreed.
Also, there is the option of a complex in C. Persia which is more secure and readily reinforced by the Russians from Volgorod if necessary.
-
Made the thread should be retitled.
Light British committment to the Middle East, breaks the game and buffs Italy out.
I’m still supporting a UK1 minor IC buy.
-
Made the thread should be retitled.
Light British committment to the Middle East, breaks the game and buffs Italy out.
I’m still supporting a UK1 minor IC buy.
Just stating the fact that it probally wont break the game.
-
Well by the current setup it IS still broken? Especially if the Allies are winning 9 out of 10 games. (Which requires a ceratin amount of correct play)
I don’t in good concience see how the Allies can lose.
-
Well by the current setup it IS still broken? Especially if the Allies are winning 9 out of 10 games. (Which requires a ceratin amount of correct play)
I don’t in good concience see how the Allies can lose.
I think you need to put more threat on Russia. I have not found it difficult for the axis to win yet. I have seen some issues I think but they are all player related.
1) Too much emphasis on warships in the Atlantic
2) Germany 1 attacks spread way too thin
3) Germany/Italy not working in concert
4) Germany not threatening Russia too effectively
5) Timid Japan in Russia (The Amur issue is a non-starter, just friggin attack already.)
6) Too much concern over London.Note: Berlin, Rome, Paris, St. Petersburg, Stalingrad, Cairo, Moscow, and Warsaw give you victory. You dont NEED London to win. So why are you bothering with it? Threaten England enough so they spend a couple rounds building defense giving Italy a break and beat up the Russians. I think too many players are stuck in the “Gotta do Sea Lion” mindset.
-
I don’t play for London, it’s almost always an eastern front game, unless the UK is being an idiot.
I find more often than not, going sea-lion is a big mistake.
That said, most of the time London spends it’s efforts trying to keep the Axis out of the middle east - after securing it’s capital.
What I consider, is how I could “beat myself” or someone of similar calibre as the Axis. I’m just not seeing it. The economic climb they face is huge, and they suffer detriment immediately. Despite the focus. Russia can make short work of the Germans regardless of when they attack. It’s all just the “delay” game.
The Pacific is a litte more exciting, but with the bulk of US attention going there, as you regularily, and so grandly put Jennifer, how are the japanese supposed to pull it off?
The axis just don’t have enough time to meet the gains they need to meet to stay in the game and win it. IMO.
-
I dont see Russia as that strong.
G4 invade Russia with large stacks in Baltic, E. Poland and Arkhangelsk.
J4 invade Russia with massive forces in Amur and landings in the north.
I4 reinforce German defenses so any attack is a losing proposition for the Russians.Press in from there.
-
G4 invade Russia with large stacks in Baltic, E. Poland and Arkhangelsk
The Russians can easily have as many men and tanks positioned in or Leningrad or Belorus or wherever during your proposed invasion. Not to mention the fact that you admittedly are moving your navy to a position of which it will take no less than 2 turns to return from, because you are not proposing the invasion of Leningrad.
Your said “large” stacks, are 3 medium stacks by definition, because they will all face a significant larger stack.
On relatively equal footing, your opponent then pools his resources to make his super stack crush your “large” but really medium stack, and you lose a bunch of units and your edge for nothing.
Medium stacks are the biggest mistake anyone can make in Axis and Allies, especially on the Russian front.
That’s a MAJOR fail.
J4 invade Russia with massive forces in Amur and landings in the north.
I am a big advocate of Japanese invasion of Russian Territory, but why J4? This is another axis fail. the average game length dictates that you should invade by J2 at the latest. Why are you waiting to attack the Russians as soon as your at war with everything else on the board? What are you thinking here?
I4 reinforce German defenses so any attack is a losing proposition for the Russians.
So instead of building units to conquer the middle east / africa, and secure Italies OWN nation objectives, which require all of it’s income (save for money spent on aircraft) You propose to build infantry, abandon the bulk stalwart of the Italian game, and mush a few extra infantry to the eastern front?
All three of these suggesstions are utterly insane, and only bolster my point that allies can force the win on a VERY regular basis, with strict playstyle.
-
And yet, I have not had an issue in any game with those three suggestions.
Russia CAN attack, but they will have to do so with a significant portion of their forces and any survivors will be utterly destroyed.
Japan waiting until Round 4 allows them to take out India and China. Then invade Amur and those pesky 6 Russians can do nothing but flee for their lives.
Italy can do both, hit Africa AND send a moderate force to reinforce the Germans or take a forward position and allow German planes to land.
-
What does Italy’s “moderate” force amount to?
And how can Russia be counter attacked? If they plaster your entire naval landing at Archangelsk? Oh wait they can’t.
You might get Leningrad for a turn. But who’s covering your south eastern flank?
So you are saying by J4 They can have Crushed India, AND China? and be back off the coast of Japan to Annihilate the Russians???
Suggested Topics
