Thanks Wild Bill, you have definitely inspired me… I will make a new thread for advice on my American strategy video.
Are you going to mention the Norway strategy. For new players, its where the us takes Norway and Finland, builds a minor factory in both places, and gets increased factory production. That way, the us can place down 10 units in the Norway region. Also what is your guys opinion on this plan? BTW, great video.
Are you going to mention the Norway strategy. For new players, its where the us takes Norway and Finland, builds a minor factory in both places, and gets increased factory production. That way, the us can place down 10 units in the Norway region. Also what is your guys opinion on this plan? BTW, great video.
I think you mean 8? An improved mIC can produce at most 4 units.
In Second Edition, it is 3 at a Minor IC and you can’t build a Major in Norway, unless you are Germany.
OOB 1st Edition, without Alpha changes, would be 10 in Norway and 3 allowed in Finland.
It is a good US strategy.
Minor complexes can only build 3 units. Majors can no longer be built on territories in which the controlling country was not the original owner. Ex. USA cannot build a Major on Norway.
Edit: what wittmann said.
@wittmann:
In Second Edition, it is 3 at a Minor IC and you can’t build a Major in Norway, unless you are Germany.
OOB 1st Edition, without Alpha changes, would be 10 in Norway and 3 allowed in Finland.
It is a good US strategy.
I know, but I think they were referring to the technology of Improved Factory Production, where mIC’s can produce 4 units and MIC’s can produce 12.
Sorry!
Whoops. We never play with tech, I didn’t even know that was one of the upgrades!
What I meant was that the allies would build two minor factories, one in Norway, and the other in Finland. I thought increased factory production meant that you could build five units in a minor factory. I am sorry for the misunderstanding.
Cool video.
I would try to gradually include more A&A vocabulary into these videos, using repitition alot so that people pick up on it. For example, a novice A&A player needs to familiarize themselves with the concepts “count” and “punch”. You could illustrate these concepts in your discussion of opening battles like SZ 97. You could say “UK has a punch of 15 and a count of 7 against Italy’s punch of 19 and count of 6. To minimize risk, UK should bring in another fighter to increase his punch to 18 with a count of 8. But even then there is a 20% risk of failure if Italy scrambles. So we bring in one more fighter to make the punch 21 and the count 9…with this deployment Italy would be a foolish to scramble”…and so on. Try to integrate concepts and vocabulary into the analysis of opening battles so the viewer gets an idea of the reasoning behind all this.
Looking forward to the next one!
I’ve never heard the words “count” and “punch” used for those concepts…I usually use “attack/defense” or “pips” for 6*expected number of hits, and “hits” for the number of hits that can be taken.
My vocabulary and the way I talk comes naturally, adding words in my videos that I don’t use during game play would just come across as sounding phony.
Your video series is excellent. One request I have especially for UK would be to expand on what to do with bid dollars and why. I have been a forum viewer for some time and finally decided to try forum games and start posting a bit. It seems UK gets the bid dollars most so what should their priorities be? What is your goal bid for allies? Why?
Your video series is excellent. One request I have especially for UK would be to expand on what to do with bid dollars and why. I have been a forum viewer for some time and finally decided to try forum games and start posting a bit. It seems UK gets the bid dollars most so what should their priorities be? What is your goal bid for allies? Why?
I never play online and I’ve never modified the setup with a bid, so I would be unable to offer any insight into it. However, I hear that a British submarine in the Med makes the Toranto raid a slam dunk, and an ANZAC infantry on the Dutch new Guinea provides an easy 5 IPC NO when at war.
Well done, Grasshopper. Unfortunately, I can’t watch it in China. Is it possible to upload to somewhere else.
Well done, Grasshopper. Unfortunately, I can’t watch it in China. Is it possible to upload to somewhere else.
Like where?
I like your videos… Nice work even that i don’t agree with all of the strategies you post… now i have seen the taranto raid… It is nice, but I would never do it. first of all because that this british fleet is used to keep the control over the middeleast. 2nd you can move it do the pacific to re-take ductch east india special when you gathers it with the fleet from the pacific. This fleet gives you the mobility in the middeleast theater, so don’t vasted it on taranto. It is bad moving units out of london, it is dangerous if germany want to do a sealion…. With a lot of transporters you are able to hit Egypt and Transjordan from Iraq and south africa it one move away. you can move a lot of units around and that means you have the upper hand. You can easliy reopen the suez channel… a good buy for South africa is on transporter and 1 man + 1 art. Then move your transporters north and south, and if calcutta is under pressure move them east and west
If you build a minor industrial complex in persia the middel east is saved. biside the americans are coming and take back Gibraltar and can easy move in and take away the bonus for no ships in the mediterranean, and the same with Morocco. that is half of the Italian economy if the british are able to hold Egypt.
as a first buy for the british I buy 7 men for london and one transporter for south africa. Then i take the transporter from sz 98 and sent one man to persia right a way, because in the next round i can build a industri complex there and still 8 men from London. The reason for that the 2nd round is the one where the british have most money and can afford it… Then I move all from exept one man from alexanderia back to Egypt. Of course i kill the italien destroyer and transporter at Malta… Transporters is importent for Italy…
2nd round i can move 4 men into egypt with my transporters, that is enough to protect egypt, for that round, and with the transporters you can always get more units in there, Another thing is that everything south of Sahara can be attacked from south africa with a transporter, so it can be take back easy.
3nd round you are able to buy tanks in persia… :)
if Italy is theathen Iraq then you have to attack Iraq… If Italy is Theathen Egypt and you will loose expensive units and thinking of evacuate then do it to transjordan… Because it have the biggest value for the axis… it is 12 IPC worth for them… it is a difference of 18 IPC… Africa don’t have that amount.
If the japanese player is very skilled it will take most of the american economy to fight him, and therefore it is good to have an oppertunity to prevent italy to take the middeleast, and if you are unlucky with the taranto raid then italy can gain the hole middeleast and get a huge boost to their economy…
I have a saying the one who is controlling the middeleast is the one who is winning the game… try this out…
Good day to you, coolrunner!
The Taranto raid should not be disqualified too quickly. It is part of multiple allied strategies that back up this action.
The strategy you described also sounds valid. Why? Because it is part of a bigger picture -philosophy if you want- that backs up your UK actions here by all the other allied actions. Same counts for Taranto. ‘Tobruk’ is also a valid action which normally should exclude ‘Taranto’ and requires the allies to adapt their actions elsewhere to make the big picture work. Note that I am assuming no bid and not too much of dice-gambling.
Just remember the big picture is made of a lot of smaller pictures and the Middle East is such a smaller picture. About winning the game if you control the middle east: this usually is true, but this still depends on who controls it and when -the big picture determines if loosing this theatre is bad. For example: if Italy can take the ME early in the game, this is bad for the allies if they cannot quickly take it back. Game loosing even. If the allies can make sure that Italy only has a very short control of the region, it is not that bad.
I have also seen a lot of Japanese take the entire middle east late in the game. Almost or just all the way to (but not including) Cairo and not win the game in the end. All because the allies had made enough gains elsewhere…
I like your videos… Nice work even that i don’t agree with all of the strategies you post… now i have seen the taranto raid… It is nice, but I would never do it. first of all because that this british fleet is used to keep the control over the middeleast. 2nd you can move it do the pacific to re-take ductch east india special when you gathers it with the fleet from the pacific. This fleet gives you the mobility in the middeleast theater, so don’t vasted it on taranto. It is bad moving units out of london, it is dangerous if germany want to do a sealion…. With a lot of transporters you are able to hit Egypt and Transjordan from Iraq and south africa it one move away. you can move a lot of units around and that means you have the upper hand. You can easliy reopen the suez channel… a good buy for South africa is on transporter and 1 man + 1 art. Then move your transporters north and south, and if calcutta is under pressure move them east and west
If you build a minor industrial complex in persia the middel east is saved. biside the americans are coming and take back Gibraltar and can easy move in and take away the bonus for no ships in the mediterranean, and the same with Morocco. that is half of the Italian economy if the british are able to hold Egypt.
as a first buy for the british I buy 7 men for london and one transporter for south africa. Then i take the transporter from sz 98 and sent one man to persia right a way, because in the next round i can build a industri complex there and still 8 men from London. The reason for that the 2nd round is the one where the british have most money and can afford it… Then I move all from exept one man from alexanderia back to Egypt. Of course i kill the italien destroyer and transporter at Malta… Transporters is importent for Italy…
2nd round i can move 4 men into egypt with my transporters, that is enough to protect egypt, for that round, and with the transporters you can always get more units in there, Another thing is that everything south of Sahara can be attacked from south africa with a transporter, so it can be take back easy.
3nd round you are able to buy tanks in persia… :)
if Italy is theathen Iraq then you have to attack Iraq… If Italy is Theathen Egypt and you will loose expensive units and thinking of evacuate then do it to transjordan… Because it have the biggest value for the axis… it is 12 IPC worth for them… it is a difference of 18 IPC… Africa don’t have that amount.
If the japanese player is very skilled it will take most of the american economy to fight him, and therefore it is good to have an oppertunity to prevent italy to take the middeleast, and if you are unlucky with the taranto raid then italy can gain the hole middeleast and get a huge boost to their economy…
I have a saying the one who is controlling the middeleast is the one who is winning the game… try this out…
If Taranto works (which it should, unless Germany/Italy scramble hoping to get lucky), then Italy is not threatening the Middle East anytime soon. London is only deprived of one fighter, which can be replaced. If you don’t kill the Italian fleet, then they can merge and the Americans won’t be able to save the Med while simultaneously stopping Japan. You can still take Persia and Ethiopia turn 1 and built a transport in South Africa, and then easily take Iraq turn 2 with 5-8 troops (3 or 4 in Persia and 2 from South Africa, 2 more from Ethiopia). Being able to build the IC in Persia one turn earlier is good, but you don’t need the Mediterranean fleet to defend the Middle East, since Italy won’t be able to attack it for a long time. Going to the Pacific is slightly more helpful, but I think the US is best at that.
Of course the US is better dealing with the japanese fleet in the pacific. But this english fleet shall hold and protect is transporters. The then big thing is to distract the japanese to move against you which can make an opener for the americans… This is the dynamic in this game :) That side that are the best to move around and can keep the middeleast wins the game
