I would like to contiue this discussion. I think it’s very important, and it’s why i registered. I kind of got included in the site bashing yesterday, but I wasn’t site bashing at all. I will grant that some strategies posted aren’t sound, and it almost seems as though some are reaching at times ( or illegal). however since no two gaming sessions are alike I think it’s not possible to sit down and say as country X you need to do Y.
I have been browsing the link sites, and I didn’t see any strategy any more impressive.
I think the over all stragety of the game is probably familiar to all of us. germany must attack - and since east is easiest - you attack russia first. most people defend with russia, and I personally have never had long term success throwing your armor away in the ukraine on R1. UK developes air and sea units to support usa troops, and japan goes against history and attacks russia to win the game.
these are all SOUND gameing strategies. but in the fluidity of the game that landing in alaska does develope, I’ve taken it and reinforced it enough to draw us troops away from a germany on the brink of collapse. to be honest I don’t think it’s possible to take the usa in a one day session. and the opposite holds true as well, I’ve taken canada to force a troop build up to prevent american ship building. I think such spoiling attacks are valid as strategy in so far as IF they are used to make your opponent react in a specific and desired way.
as you have noted looking for the early knock out, with a transport and one infantry is not very realistic. but if that guy slips into a capital captures thirty bucks then gets waxed well you’re still up nineteen dollars, and your enemies start second guessing them selves. maybe a generic strategy category, with a list of “watch for the opportunity” categories isn’t a bad idea. but i think the radical strategies still have a place assuming they are legal. some house rules by the way contain airborne assualts allowing bombers to deploy infantry and capture territory.
Japanese ventures outside pressuring Russia must be done in moderation. Too much energy supplied to an American invasion before the fall of Russia can be easily contained while the Japanese push into Russia stalls. The American energy diverted to taking back Canada and Alaska can be temperarily offset by Russian troops re-directed from Asia to Europe. The Japanese then scramble to re-establish their fronts in Asia while all other gains stall or are lost. The Allies gain build up time in Europe.
If this scenario is working for you, your Allied opponents are falling into a panic unnecessarily. The UK player sounds mostly ineffective.
Diversionary tactics to gain quick and easy IPC’s are just that. Too much commitment to gain a few IPC’s without any strategic gain can cost you the war.
right and I agree, however, I was pointing out the effectiveness of these attacks as feints, to draw forces away from your allies. typically as the axis, my main goal is to make UK ineffective. if you destroy all her transports (you needn’t be concerned about the battleships), and use your airpower to maintain that situation, you have in effect gained both numerical and economcal superiority over your lone remaining advesary- russia- regardless of any T1 attacks. however that fighter screen will not last forever, and thanks to poor dice rolls, I have found myself with the usa chomping at the bit. so with japan in control of most of asia, sending a few transports to alsaska to take away some infantry from the atlantic is a very good and effective strategy, no they can’t take over the usa, but I can assure you that they won’t be ignored. - I only noted that to try and show that just because a strategy may seem ludicrous on the web site, that it may still have a place and should not necessarilly be dismissed without examining it’s validity in given situations.
How bout you just play the game to have fun…mix it up a litte. NO do the same thing over and over again…thats lame.
Alamein,
Your strategy IS sound. Mainly my comment was directed towards your enemy, who seemed to be falling for your trap. You know how it is, if it works - do it.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it
The ends DO often justify the means
