Countering the Russian Fall Back Line


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    Instead of me saying “Germany has won the war” I should’ve said “Germany has effectively beaten the Allies to the point to which they can no longer effectively do anything to the Axis powers as a whole.”

    That’s a pretty important distinction.

    Germany begins with 30 IPC’s. The taking of all 3 provinces of France brings the number up to 39 IPC’s. Having also taken Bulgaria, Finland, and Morocco and/or Algeria brings the number up to 44 IPC’s a turn. Assuming we’re talking the Germans having reached and captured Moscow by then, the Germans should have gotten all the former Soviet Territory from East Poland to Smolensk and Bryansk, adding a whopping 11 more IPC’s to the count, making 55 IPC’s a turn, and thats WITHOUT having taken Leningrad, Stalingrad, or Moscow. Now, assuming the Germans suceed in taking Moscow that’s 3 more IPC’s for the territory to include 2 more 1 for each territory north and south being able to blitz into Moscow adding a total of 5 more IPC’s to the count making 60 IPC’s a turn, adding on the bonus money the Soviet Union had before losing their capital, but for the purposes of consistency I will ignore this number. We’re not done yet. Assuming the Germans will have secured the Northern and Southern Industrial hubs of the Soviet Union whilst on their way to Moscow or clean it up after taking it, we have Leningrad and Karelia with a total of 3 IPC’s, Stalingrad and the Caucasus being 4 IPC’s and blitz through Archangel for the hell of it making 8 more IPC’s to the count, bringing the number to 68 IPC’s. Now, assuming the Germans have control of this having properly reached Moscow, gives them National Objective money of a whopping 20 IPC’s, 1 for each Soviet City and 1 for taking the Caucasus, bringing the number to 88 IPC’s a turn.

    I suppose this makes a bigger difference on just the Europe board vs the global board.

    This is how much the Germans can pack by G6-G8. With the American floating bridge made a possibility for landing in France, do I even need to explain the unit builds to counter a meager 8 units at a time being sent over to Southern France?

    Now that we’ve counted all the POTENTIAL money Germany can be making, let’s count Italy.

    Italy possess a meager 10 IPC’s to start. assuming Germany and Italy did the 3 plane scramble should eliminate any and all ships that went into the Taranto Raid, leaving them to take out the French ships bordering Southern France. Having taken Greece for 2 IPC’s. Tunisia for 1, Egypt/Sudan for 1, and Kenya for 1, makes 5 IPC’s along with the Italian national objective of no boats in the med giving them 20 IPC’s on their first turn. On turn 2, the Germans will be moving down to secure Gibraltar, as well as taking out Southern France giving Italy another National Objective of 5 IPC’s, as well as having taken Alexandria on turn 1 and finishing off with taking Algeria on turn 2 making for another national objective of 5 IPC’s, leaving Italy with 30 IPC’s to spend on the 2nd turn on ships needs to build up a navy. Keep in mind, by now the entirety of the British airforce should be either destroyed or fulled away from the Med to deal with Japan. Allowing the Italians to freely and safely rebuild their destroyed navy assuming the British made a successful Taranto Raid, combined with the slowly growing German Navy in the Med to protect the Italian navy.

    Eliminating all boats in the Med turn 1 is not a guarantee depending on the effectiveness of the Taranto raid. I’ve certainly had it where this objective was not achievable.

    With all this in mind, the Germans and Italians will be making automatic headway immediately towards Cairo to take it by turn 4 or turn 5, which is right when the Americans are SET to start the floating bridge.

    Now setting the Luftwaffe aside, with the Germans and Italians having properly built up a navy and ready for action, setup inside Seazone 92, and you’ve stopped the floating bridge just like that. The Americans cannot and will not attack this navy, because they have no interest risking over 12 transports worth of IPCs to end up in the water, so the presence of the Luftwaffe is out of the question and can be prioritized on taking Moscow.

    Why does America need to be worried about Warships moving though the straight of Gibralter to attack the weaker bridge.

    Consider the fact that you said floating bridge or not tells me that I dont think you fully understand the merits at which the Americans are capable of doing their floating bridge. Because inevitably they’ll spend more on the Europe side than the Eastern side. And in my thread that I made on how to counter the Floating bridge, Japan plays a SIGNIFICANT role in this.

    General Hand Grenade may have told you that “As long as you keep Honolulu and Sydney the Japanese can’t win the game for the Axis.” And frankly, if he and everybody else thinks that all it takes is to just ‘watch over those 2 territories and the Japanese never win’ than they might need to reevaluate themselves. Because the moment I’m finished up with Calcutta and are collecting 50+ IPC’s then this is going to happen: 10 transports, 20 guys, my entire navy, my entire airforce, take midway, attack Hawaii and win the game. The Japanese don’t have to even break a sweat to do this, and the fact that my American enemy is so willing to leave the Pacific theater alone is absolutely splendid for me as Japan.

    1. If you’ve pulled back your entire navy and airforce as Japan after taking India I wager a middle Earth UK won’t struggle to reclaim it. By the time you reach Hawaii or Sydney you may very well have lost India again.
    2. 10 Transports? You can talk about a lot of things but I know Japan’s capabilities. If you have 10 transports at that stage of the game you are most certainly weak on ground forces in the mainland. Especially with 3 factories built. If you are weak on mainland ground forces you are in trouble as Japan.

    Like I said, a proper German player doesn’t need to cover Norway, Denmark, Western Germany, Northern Italy, Rome or Normandy simply if they understand how the Floating Bridge works. The floating bridge works in such a way that 2 sets of 8 transports shuck troops back and forth into Africa from N. America. Then, the way the utilize Southern France is with the very fact that with 1 single group of transports, they can move back and forward taking guys into France only need 12 transports in total to take guys form North America to Morocco and then into Southern France. If the Americans wanted to make a floating Bridge that linked into Normandy or Denmark than that would require an entire extra link of 4 transports to get troops in there. This is why America prioritizes landing in Southern France.

    You very much need to cover all those places because even a one shot landing on Western Germany is worth losing a few transports. You take Western Germany and downgrade the industrial complex. Sure they take it back but Germany’s ability to defend just got a lot harder when you can’t pump out enough guys to defend with.

    Another thing to note is that you only need 3 sets of transports if you use the north Atlantic route. Its even more protected. Early landings can be effective with sets of 3 or even 2 transports but the American probably has 3. it doesn’t take much to transform the line so that you only need to cover a single portion of exposed transports with your navy. You go from Canada, to UK with a set, and half a set sits in the English channel. You have air cover from scramble too. If the German fleet is in the med without air support they can have it. You unload Gibralter to close off of the straight then switch targets north where the Germans have nothing to answer with.

    As for the last paragraph you posted, what are you sorry for?

    If you’re sorry for the idea that this isn’t a ‘new strategy’ than, with all do respect, I suggest you look back at my original post of what this strategy was all about.

    I think its obvious that if we send everything we have into Russia that we’ll find some success in taking them out. Until a certain General hand Grenade came along and said he developed a strategy for the Soviet Union involving counter attacking that was ‘impossible’ to defeat. And taking it upon myself, I found a way to counter the so said ‘unbeatable’ strategy. Like I said before, this Blitzkrieg opening is in no way supposed to thoroughly go through every single move of Barbarossa. Because after you’ve broken the Soviet Maginot Line 2.0 than the game runs like clock work of taking more Soviet territory by the second.

    I watched the soviet strategy and its not the Soviet strat that holds back the Germans. I can already see several flaws in the GHG Russia strat and I’ve played it. Its the fallback in conjunction with Middle Earth in conjunction with Floating Bridge that work together with the two latter being the more important. He buys a tank and an artillery each turn. in hopes of destroying exposed German armor. The solution is simple, don’t expose your armor by spreading too thin.

    As for winning the game, the Axis do what the Axis do best, and win the game quickly. By G6 when the Germans are on the doorstep of Moscow, they’ve taken Stalingrad and Leningrad, and likely Cairo, and all of a sudden the very means at which the USA is finally prepared to make landings in London, it’s already too late. All 8 victory cities have been won for the Axis on the Europe side of the board.

    The Allies’ only hope at winning is to draw out the game, make it long. There’s no magic bullet the US can use to make a quick landing in Berlin and end the whole war. The game needs to be drawn out and weighted to which the Allies arrive to save the Soviet Union. These are 2 different playable aspects that collide with each other to win it all.

    When this game made it’s debut, everybody did Barbarossa. They did it, had success and said “I’m bored, I need to find a new method of winning.” Because at the end of the day this game goes so much more in depth than just doing a Barbarossa attack. I’ve had the privilege of being able to see this concept multiple times starting from Axis and Allies 1941 edition to A&A Anniversary, A&A 1942 edition, all the way to Global 1940. I can say from experience of many previous games that this strategy goes more in depth than just the Barbarossa attack.

    I hope this clears the air of confusion and misconception.

    And yet all you are Suggesting is G3 Barbarossa variant with Afrika Korps. both strategies everyone including GHG is aware of for some time as the leading contenders in the Axis arsenal. Both strategies that GHG claims are not reliable enough to counter The allied combo of Russia Fallback, Floating Bridge and most of all Middle Earth.


  • @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    Eliminating all boats in the Med turn 1 is not a guarantee depending on the effectiveness of the Taranto raid. I’ve certainly had it where this objective was not achievable.

    Yeah, it kind of is. Unless you get diced, pretty much everything is going into the water with the exception of maybe a British bomber. I’ve done the rolling, looked at all the possible scenarios that good go through with the Taranto Raid, and like I said, unless the Italians get diced, which I couldn’t be less concerned about what my dice rolls are, pretty much everything is going into the water.

    Why does America need to be worried about Warships moving though the straight of Gibralter to attack the weaker bridge.

    Why do they need to be worried? Because this is fastest and only genuine link they have of getting divisions into Europe. On top of that, a campaign in North Africa to take Cairo only leaves the Americans with the choice of having to stop the Germans and Italians. The Americans can’t be screwing around trying to make landings in far off places, they need to be getting to Europe as quickly as they possibly can to save the Soviets in a well timed and not-rushed manor.

    1. If you’ve pulled back your entire navy and airforce as Japan after taking India I wager a middle Earth UK won’t struggle to reclaim it. By the time you reach Hawaii or Sydney you may very well have lost India again.
    2. 10 Transports? You can talk about a lot of things but I know Japan’s capabilities. If you have 10 transports at that stage of the game you are most certainly weak on ground forces in the mainland. Especially with 3 factories built. If you are weak on mainland ground forces you are in trouble as Japan.

    Be authentic here. You’re assuming that I’ve pulled my navy and airforce completely out of the mainland continent of Asia. Be realistic because obviously that wouldn’t be the case. And if Calcutta has fallen to the Japanese, which it likely will, then the Middle Earth strategy wasn’t properly utilized, or it’s effectiveness if being overstretched and overrated.

    How am I weak on ground forces? Japan should be prioritizing transports to reach the corners of the Pacific in obtaining the Money islands and make landings on Southern Asia. 10 transports is chump change to Japan, especially when they build transports over a series of turns instead of all at once like Germany has to do with Sealion. All I’m literally doing is taking these transports back to Japan, building up units to invade Hawaii, I’m not even spending as much as I would for like I would be in a German Sealion attack.

    You very much need to cover all those places because even a one shot landing on Western Germany is worth losing a few transports. You take Western Germany and downgrade the industrial complex. Sure they take it back but Germany’s ability to defend just got a lot harder when you can’t pump out enough guys to defend with.

    Dude, it goes as simple as putting 10 guys on Western Germany before the invasion is even coming, because you would know this as well as I do that as the Axis, the Floating Bridge isn’t exactly anything worthy of calling it a ‘surprise attack.’ And no, no it’s not worth losing ‘a few’ transports. Because what’s going to happen is your going to throw your navy and 4-8 transports to land in Western Germany only for the invasion to be repelled and your link of sending guys to Europe broken. Like I said, I could care less if the Americans make landings close to my industrial hubs, it makes my job easier clearing out the wasps from the hive.

    Another thing to note is that you only need 3 sets of transports if you use the north Atlantic route. Its even more protected. Early landings can be effective with sets of 3 or even 2 transports but the American probably has 3. it doesn’t take much to transform the line so that you only need to cover a single portion of exposed transports with your navy. You go from Canada, to UK with a set, and half a set sits in the English channel. You have air cover from scramble too. If the German fleet is in the med without air support they can have it. You unload Gibralter to close off of the straight then switch targets north where the Germans have nothing to answer with.

    No, you need 4 dude. Look at the seazones and analyze. The reason you only need 3 when going to Southern France is that you can have your navy and 4 transports on Seazone 93, and constantly move units to 93, then back to 92 ready to take the next set of guys from Morocco. It takes up 2 of the transports movement.

    As for doing this with Normandy, you have to have 4 sets of 4 transports. 2 sets of transports are going back and forward from Morocco to North America back to Morocco. If you wanted to go up to Normandy from Morocco, you need to go through Sea zones 104 and 105 to make a landing which uses up all the movement of the transports, therefore, if you wanna shuck guys into Normandy or anywhere else consistently every turn you need another set of transports.

    As for doing this with Canada, it still takes a whole turn of moving units from Eastern US to Canada, you’re not compensating for anything with this being as it’s still gonna take them 4 turns to get there.

    I watched the soviet strategy and its not the Soviet strat that holds back the Germans. I can already see several flaws in the GHG Russia strat and I’ve played it. Its the fallback in conjunction with Middle Earth in conjunction with Floating Bridge that work together with the two latter being the more important. He buys a tank and an artillery each turn. in hopes of destroying exposed German armor. The solution is simple, don’t expose your armor by spreading too thin.

    Well I’m glad you dont think so, because General Hand Grenade and a lot of other people sure think it does. You should swoop by his “Middle Earth” thread sometime and see some of the posts he made debating with other Axis players about how Middle Earth works to which the Soviets will be quote on quote “Destroying Germany with their counter attacking”.

    Frankly, my duty was to find a counter to all 3 of these strategies, so in the event that all 3 of them were used it would be more than easy of me to counter one for the rest of them to fall apart, seeing as you said they work ‘harmoniously’ together. Which is the exact weakness of the Allies, the fact that in order to win the game they need to have all 3 players of each Allied power

    If the solution was ‘simple’ than was mine not transparent enough? I literally gave my 2 cents in telling any Axis player to do what Germany did in real life, and use Blitzkrieg to pass this Maginot Line 2.0 that the Soviets have created. This stuff isn’t rocket science. The idea at which General Hand Grenade imposes this strategy he ends up telling everybody it’s impossible to beat since you only have the 2 options of moving everything in or only your infantry in, which you don’t have to do either. With GHG and alot of other people making it sound like you need to throw everything you have at this simple Russian defense line to break through tell me they didn’t do anything actual thinking in how to go about doing this. I can afford to do alot of other things than Barbarossa with the Blitzkrieg tactic at my disposal, like Afrika Korps or Noher Osten.

    And yet all you are Suggesting is G3 Barbarossa variant with Afrika Korps. both strategies everyone including GHG is aware of for some time as the leading contenders in the Axis arsenal. Both strategies that GHG claims are not reliable enough to counter The allied combo of Russia Fallback, Floating Bridge and most of all Middle Earth.

    Is that really all I’m suggesting though? I’ve been thorough about what I’ve been trying to convey. A proper means of strategies at which the Germans can employ to defeat The Russian Fall Back Line, Middle Earth, and the Floating Bridge.

    It’s fascinating how he merely ‘claimed’ that Afrika Korps and a G3 Barbarossa don’t counter his assortment of Allies strategies instead of actually ‘showing’ that it can’t be done, because with the first time go at fighting these 3 strategies I was able to counter all 3 of them.

    In due time I’ll create a thread for countering Middle Earth, but the details are still vague and on the table for figuring it out, but for the most part I have it all down and dealt with to fight back against the Middle Earth tactic.

    The compilation of Blitzkrieg, Afrikakorps, and Noher Osten each prioritize on one of each Allied nation and imposes their will on whatever strategy they spark up. I’ve said countless times now that this is so much more than just a G3 Barbarossa, but merely a tactic at which you defeat the so said ‘unbeatable strategy’.

    I think we’ve hit rock bottom on this discussion. My objective was to counter this compilation of Allied strategies and I’ve done just that. The only thing you’re telling me at this point is the fact that the Allies merely have to do what they’re already doing in their corresponding strategies whether you’re the USSR, UK, or USA to which I’ve said multiple times that if the Allies truly wish to find a counter to these German strategies, develop and design a new strategy to beat it instead of telling me all the old, drawn out and vague reasons for why the previous strategy that everybody knows about still beats the Germans because of this reason and because of that reason. That’s what this community is about, when one side finds a strategy that outbeats the other, the other side takes it upon themselves to find something new to counter that strategy that had previously countered their strategy instead of naming off the million and one reasons why the new strategy that has proved to counter the old one ‘can’t counter it’ because of this reason and this circumstance.

    Frankly, as per the Allies side of the forums, if they want to become better Axis players then I merely have one thing to say.

    You’ll always become better at playing the Axis until you let the Allies side of you say otherwise.


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    Eliminating all boats in the Med turn 1 is not a guarantee depending on the effectiveness of the Taranto raid. I’ve certainly had it where this objective was not achievable.

    Yeah, it kind of is. Unless you get diced, pretty much everything is going into the water with the exception of maybe a British bomber. I’ve done the rolling, looked at all the possible scenarios that good go through with the Taranto Raid, and like I said, unless the Italians get diced, which I couldn’t be less concerned about what my dice rolls are, pretty much everything is going into the water.

    There is a lot of conjecture in your defense here. I want to dissect the Med just to show you how swingy that is. removing all allied warships turn 1 as Axis requires a lot of luck. I would wager it maybe 50:50 you can succeed at that. maybe 60:40.

    You have the Taranto raid which I have often, not all the time, but often preserved 1 or more ships. Why does this matter? It’s an additional seazone Italy will have to counter with their remaining ships which are a sub, destroyer, cruiser and a bomber because the scramble lost the fighters.

    In the case that the carrier is is healthy with a fighter or two or maybe even just a destroyer. What are the odds with the remaining Italian assets that you can reliably eliminate the allied assets in the med? You can send the sub to take out the British destroyer but that’s 50:50. Send a bomber too, sure. Check that box. Then you are left to match the French ships which is also a 50:50. That is a far cry form a likelihood. The odds that all those things work together in the same game is also something to consider.

    The Mediterranean openings are very swingy and unreliable.

    Odds are the British popped the Itallian ships at malta. Even more likely if the cruiser in SZ 91 survives the german subs, which can happen.

  • 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 Customizer


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    Another thing to note is that you only need 3 sets of transports if you use the north Atlantic route. Its even more protected. Early landings can be effective with sets of 3 or even 2 transports but the American probably has 3. it doesn’t take much to transform the line so that you only need to cover a single portion of exposed transports with your navy. You go from Canada, to UK with a set, and half a set sits in the English channel. You have air cover from scramble too. If the German fleet is in the med without air support they can have it. You unload Gibralter to close off of the straight then switch targets north where the Germans have nothing to answer with.

    No, you need 4 dude. Look at the seazones and analyze. The reason you only need 3 when going to Southern France is that you can have your navy and 4 transports on Seazone 93, and constantly move units to 93, then back to 92 ready to take the next set of guys from Morocco. It takes up 2 of the transports movement.

    This is where you show some inexperience. I’ll walk you through it. You move your ground units into eastern Canada, and transports into SZ106, You move second set of transports to SZ 109. The third sits in SZ110 the English Channel.

    SZ 106 is safe for obvious reasons. SZ 109 has air cover form both England and Scotland, and SZ 110 has the bulk of the Yankee Navy under the umbrella of British aircover from England. 3 sets. Its cheaper and it’s safer, and you get units in the fight just as quickly.

    You can set it up just as fast by having enough transports and ground units ready at the bringing of turn 4 when you move the first set to Gibraltar to close the straight and claim Morocco. Meanwhile a second set simultaneously moves to SZ 106 and troops march up to Eastern Canada. Turn 5 you make beach-head in Europe with everything from Gibraltar while moving everything from Canada to England. The third set moves to Canada. Congratulations, you’ve just built a faster, cheaper land bridge, and can spend more monies on other stuff, like planes and bombers.

    If the German navy is locked in the Med and the Luftwaffe is in Eastern Europe, you don’t need to “finish” the floating bridge. You can build it over time. The reason you have to build it up so much as per GHG is because of the threat of the Luftwaffe.

    Missing this sort of detail a significant oversight and shows that there are some aspects of this game that escape your vision. It leads me to believe what your playtests are missing a key perspective and could be more thorough. I believe you severely underestimate the capability and flexibility the allies have in the Atlantic when Germany abandon’s post.

    If I recall GHG’s call to action was to have somebody beat his combination allied strategy. To my knowledge nobody has taken him up on it and proved it on the table. You can tout your theories all day long but they prove nothing. You’ll have to take it to the arena with GHG. until then I have to admit, Middle earth is the real deal and a tough cookie to crack. Is there an axis combination that can beat it more reliably? Sure, but the way you are addressing it here is not the solution. It’s not about taking on each strategy alone in a vacuum, its about hitting it all together. You can’t isolate each scenario, say how to beat it, and then put the puzzle back together expecting it works the same. There is a complex balance here.


  • @pinch1

    Dude I was referring to Africa when I said that. Going from North America, to Morocco, THEN to Normandy/Bordeaux.

  • 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 Customizer

    Dam. Just attack !!!


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    Dude I was referring to Africa when I said that. Going from North America, to Morocco, THEN to Normandy/Bordeaux.

    Are you even reading the posts? You’re talking about SZ 93 in the med and I’m talking about shipping troops through the North Atlantic. Its a completely different route. I specified the exact locations and sequence for transporting. This isn’t a secret.

    I feel like you’re reading the openings, getting riled up and not reading the rest. I know this. This was me, maybe 10 years ago when I was playing a lot more. I thought I had it figured out then too. I did exactly what you’ve been outlining a decade ago. It doesn’t hold up reliably to GHG’s trifecta alliance master strategy.

    It’s not new bud. GHG even has an Afrika Korps video. He knows about it. He knows about it all. You gotta go back to the thinking tank. Try something a little more outside the box. Something like, what if the Axis can last out in a protracted war? What if Germany spent more money building up a navy contending the floating bridge instead of building heaps of ground units to try and defend Europe.

    Do some whacky fun stuff and see how it goes. Something might stick. Then play it with a lot of people other than yourself or your regulars that you beat all the time anyways. See how it holds up under that scrutiny.

    When you have that, and a pile of unconnected witnesses to agree that your material has the substance you say it does, then you can claim, you beat GHG’s strategy. Until then be humble.


  • @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    This is where you show some inexperience. I’ll walk you through it. You move your ground units into eastern Canada, and transports into SZ106, You move second set of transports to SZ 109. The third sits in SZ110 the English Channel.

    Show some inexperience? We can be civil about this dude. And if you were looking at what I had said you’d notice that I was referring to AFRICA when talking about a Floating Bridge into Normandy/Bordeaux.

    As per landing in Normandy or Holland/Belgium be my frickin’ guest and do that. I am more than happy if the Americans decide to land THAT close to my main Industrial Hub. It makes my job of defending substantially easier without having to overextend too many resources.

    SZ 106 is safe for obvious reasons. SZ 109 has air cover form both England and Scotland, and SZ 110 has the bulk of the Yankee Navy under the umbrella of British aircover from England. 3 sets. Its cheaper and it’s safer, and you get units in the fight just as quickly.

    You can set it up just as fast by having enough transports and ground units ready at the bringing of turn 4 when you move the first set to Gibraltar to close the straight and claim Morocco. Meanwhile a second set simultaneously moves to SZ 106 and troops march up to Eastern Canada. Turn 5 you make beach-head in Europe with everything from Gibraltar while moving everything from Canada to England. The third set moves to Canada. Congratulations, you’ve just built a faster, cheaper land bridge, and can spend more monies on other stuff, like planes and bombers.

    If the German navy is locked in the Med and the Luftwaffe is in Eastern Europe, you don’t need to “finish” the floating bridge. You can build it over time. The reason you have to build it up so much as per GHG is because of the threat of the Luftwaffe.

    Watch his video again then because that’s not why he builds it up so much. IS THERE A GERMAN NAVY. IS THERE A LUFTWAFFE. IS THERE A GERMAN/ITALIAN PRESENCE IN THE MED OR SOUTHERN EUROPE.

    Missing this sort of detail a significant oversight and shows that there are some aspects of this game that escape your vision. It leads me to believe what your playtests are missing a key perspective and could be more thorough. I believe you severely underestimate the capability and flexibility the allies have in the Atlantic when Germany abandon’s post.

    Missing detail? Dude, with absolute all do respect, you haven’t even mentioned one new thing to me. Not one new thing. All you’ve told me are the same old reasons for how the ‘Floating Bridge’ is unstoppable. We’re past that dude. You need to get with the program because everybody knows how the Floating Bridge works and the steps the Americans take to completing it. If you think the Americans can just walk into Europe by the get go of turn 3 when they’re at war than you can, it only reflects the ignorance you show for the Allies.

    If I recall GHG’s call to action was to have somebody beat his combination allied strategy. To my knowledge nobody has taken him up on it and proved it on the table. You can tout your theories all day long but they prove nothing. You’ll have to take it to the arena with GHG. until then I have to admit, Middle earth is the real deal and a tough cookie to crack. Is there an axis combination that can beat it more reliably? Sure, but the way you are addressing it here is not the solution. It’s not about taking on each strategy alone in a vacuum, its about hitting it all together. You can’t isolate each scenario, say how to beat it, and then put the puzzle back together expecting it works the same. There is a complex balance here.

    I could you not it seems that every Allied player is the same in this sense of thinking… We as Pro-Axis players that specialize in the Axis, don’t convey ‘theories’ to you or GHG. We tell you from EXPERIENCES, we tell you from actual PLAYTESTING. As for myself, I am a better Axis player than I am a good Allied player, because the way the Axis need to win suits my way of thinking and quick decision making.

    You prefer the Allies more than the Axis, I can tell just by the words you use. You, and GHG and all the other players that specialize more in playing the Allies all share one thing in common and it’s that you don’t take the actual experience that other players have had to heart. The game doesn’t just go down to ‘play testing it on the board and telling you what happens’ because a million things could happen.

    I am not quite sure where you’ve been this whole time we’ve been having this conversation, because I’ve conveyed very clearly of the compilation of strategies Germany should use to winning the game and I’m not going to state them again because I’ve already said them plenty of times in this thread.

    Dude, here is the reality of it. Everybody bases their account by which they’ve experienced something in a game or had a breakthrough moment of realization for something new. If you can’t recognize the fact that we as Axis players and frankly A&A players as a whole are basing these threads and strategies on previous experience than it tells me that you shouldn’t be debating with these people at all. I’m sorry dude, but your lack of understanding with how people base their opinions of how things work and the assumption of how most Axis players to include myself simply ‘theorize’ genuinely tells me that you just aren’t suited for talking with others about this kind of stuff on the forums.

    Understand that I’m trying to help you broaden your perspective of what the Axis are capable of because like GHG, you seem to only be able to look at this game from the perspective of the Allied powers.

    All I ask is for you to think on what I said earlier.

    You’ll always continue to grow as an Axis player until you let the Allies side of you tell you otherwise.

    Think about what this means, and actually playtest AS Germany, doing the combined compilation strategies of Blitzkrieg, Afrika Korps, and Noher Osten and you’ll be surprised by how much success you’ll have.

    Until then, I nor anybody else frankly is really interested in having to look at the same old reasons that have already been discussed to death for why Middle Earth is so unstoppable and why the Floating Bridge is so unstoppable because we’re past the fact that they can be defeated through multiple means at which I’ve already discussed on this thread…


  • @gen-manstein

    Much appreciated, I’ll have a look at it as soon as I can


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    You prefer the Allies more than the Axis, I can tell just by the words you use. You, and GHG and all the other players that specialize more in playing the Allies all share one thing in common and it’s that you don’t take the actual experience that other players have had to heart. The game doesn’t just go down to ‘play testing it on the board and telling you what happens’ because a million things could happen.

    I actually do prefer the Axis, so conjecture yet again. I prefer Japan actually. I am just wearing an allied hat with respect to the conversation. I took GHG’s Middle Earth strategy against some opponents when I have limited allied experience and won handily several times. Soooooo… yeah, there’s that.

    At this point I can see that we need to set up a few games. As I said, I am at heart and understanding an Axis player by preference. I’ll humor you by playing the allies for your grand opus strategy in exchange you’ll humor me by swapping roles. Maybe even a third game to even the odds if necessary.

    I can guarantee you one thing. You have grossly underestimated me. I’m open to recognize if your strategy is valid but I have to see it on the table and I’m not resorting to this back and forth much further. I think you’re plan is a bad one. You’re gonna have to bring it.


  • @pinch1

    Then think that way dude. I completely respect that.

    And once again, saying you’re more of an Allied player is an allusion to which you think more of the way an Allied player would in an actual game.

    I never doubted your ability in game at all, never underestimated you even the slightest, what purpose would I have to do that? I’ve never met you you’ve never met me I can only judge what’s right in front of my eyes and the first impression I get out of someone such as yourself.

    You nor I are new to this game, you’ve had your fair share at which people have came as the Axis or the Allies to find strategies for either one.

    But I’m here to tell you, you won’t ever know my strategy works until you try it. I’ve already playtested this, told you I playtested it, and told you it works. At this point in time, it’s up to you if you want to believe that it works since you guys are all about seeing the factual evidence at which it does work. Unfortunately I wont be able to get over to the next Time zone at which you are in for obvious reasons.

    All in all, if you think my plan is bad, then that’s fine. Just don’t look shocked when the German Roundel ends up on Moscow city.


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    All in all, if you think my plan is bad, then that’s fine. Just don’t look shocked when the German Roundel ends up on Moscow city.

    I won’t. I’ve already pointed out that it doesn’t surprise me at all. Can it close out the game though? That’s another story. I’ll be surprised if this wins more than 40% of games this way playing against GHG’s strategy. Since that’s about where the odds are sitting. Slightly weighted in the allied territory.


  • @pinch1

    Well I suppose you could look at it from 2 perspectives then.

    The players that see it coming, and the players that don’t.

    As far as Im concerned, you’re the only one that’s approached me with how to counter this by the very means of the Allies doing what they already were doing.

    And to put this answer to your question as simply as possible, yes. Yes it can close out the game. I’ve given the facts, the evidence, the reasoning, I can give nothing more to sway you to believe that this works. The only thing to get you to know and believe this works is if you try it. Set up the board when you’ve got the spare time and try Afrika Korps, Noher Osten and Blitzkrieg, thats all I can say at this point.


  • The ironic thing is that I coulda swore you said you agreed with me and my analysis of dealing with the so said Soviet Maginot Line from the start, but I guess not then.


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    Well I suppose you could look at it from 2 perspectives then.

    The players that see it coming, and the players that don’t.

    As far as Im concerned, you’re the only one that’s approached me with how to counter this by the very means of the Allies doing what they already were doing.

    Because you’re not suggesting doing anything different than what the Axis are already doing.

    And to put this answer to your question as simply as possible, yes. Yes it can close out the game. I’ve given the facts, the evidence, the reasoning, I can give nothing more to sway you to believe that this works. The only thing to get you to know and believe this works is if you try it. Set up the board when you’ve got the spare time and try Afrika Korps, Noher Osten and Blitzkrieg, thats all I can say at this point.

    You’ve given nothing but words. No facts, no evidence, reasoning but that’s subjective. At the end of the day, the words alone are empty.

    Playing by oneself commits to certain bias. You want something to work a certain way, and so you play it out that way. You can’t think fully for an opponent because deep down inside you want something to work out a certain way. Why don’t you just play me? That’s the point of the game right? To play other people.

    You’re right, you can’t say anything else at this point because when push comes to shove, deep down inside you don’t have the confidence your strategies will hold up under the scrutiny of other players at the table. That’s the ultimate test. Can you dig it?


  • @Pinch1

    Then we are done here.

    If something was confusing at first then I would have been more than entitled to clear it up.

    If you’re gonna ignore the fact that I’ve told you my own personal strategy developed and designed by me that works, then I’m done here. And incase you oblivious missed it, the strategy is called Noher Osten


  • @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    You’re right, you can’t say anything else at this point because when push comes to shove, deep down inside you don’t have the confidence your strategies will hold up under the scrutiny of other players at the table. That’s the ultimate test. Can you dig it?

    Again, conjecture from your end. You don’t know me and I don’t know you yet you think you know when I have confidence in what I’m saying? That’s incredibly crude of you dude, so we are done here.

    If you were confused I tried to clear the air of that. But if you wanna reject the proper way at which I and alot of other people go about doing this than thats a personal problem only you can figure out

    We are done here, there is nothing else


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @Pinch1

    Then we are done here.

    If something was confusing at first then I would have been more than entitled to clear it up.

    If you’re gonna ignore the fact that I’ve told you my own personal strategy developed and designed by me that works, then I’m done here. And incase you oblivious missed it, the strategy is called Noher Osten

    Oh now it’s Noher Osten. Your first mention of this Noher Osten was on the second page of posts and its wasn’t explained. You just said, Noher Osten, as if giving it name and adding it to the every growing list of pretend strategies actually means anything. First it was Blitzcrieg which isn’t a unique strategy worthy of a name. Its just attack Russia with everything but I’ll humor it. Then the clarification of adding Africa Korps, which also, was a known and very prominent German strategy already. Some would say one of the more effective strategies even.

    Noher Osten you say? This must be the secret sauce. I’ve been missing. Please subject me further to your entitlement good sir. I would like to know. What is this Noher Osten you speak of? I suspect greatly it is the missing piece of the puzzle to my understanding.

    Or you can cowboy up and play a few games. If you really want to get your name out there and be known as the one who solved the biggest conundrum in A&A global for the last half a decade be my guest. I won’t just crush you mercilessly and say your strats are crap after a single game. Dice happen. I will evaluate objectively for it’s own merits. Otherwise words words words that’s all you are is words on paper and words on the internet. You’ll be nothing more than words until you can commit.


  • @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @Pinch1

    Alright then, that’s the final straw. I’ve tried to be civil about this and have a genuine authentic conversation with you but you’ve let your ignorance get the better of you, and I’m not gonna stand by it.

    Oh now it’s Noher Osten. Your first mention of this Noher Osten was on the second page of posts and its wasn’t explained. You just said, Noher Osten, as if giving it name and adding it to the every growing list of pretend strategies actually means anything.
    First it was Blitzcrieg which isn’t a unique strategy worthy of a name. Its just attack Russia with everything but I’ll humor it. Then the clarification of adding Africa Korps, which also, was a known and very prominent German strategy already. Some would say one of the more effective strategies even.

    Yeah, it’s been Noher Osten. In case you were unaware, that means Middle East, and in case you weren’t paying attention, then again when have you ever done that since the time we’ve been talking, I’ve posted the entirety of what the strategy Noher Osten is all about in the Middle Earth thread. I’ll let you find it for yourself. No, I said it, referring to the thought out strategy at which I made for Germany to counter a Middle Earth tactic, you were just too lazy to actually read the words on the screen at which I posted and instead jumped to conclusions as you usually do and criticized me for basically nothing.

    I have no idea what Blitzcrieg is, you’ll have to tell me allllll about that strategy since I know you just get off on playing the Axis. But I do know what Blitz Krieg is. Lightning War. An incredibly simple strategy at which I didnt even say was new and authentic, since I consistently repeated that it goes as simple as doing what Germany did in real life to counter the annoyance of Russia, but then again why would you have noticed that, you’re oblivious, cocky, and naïve to have actually notice and recognize what other people have to say.

    It sounds to me that you have a personal problem going on of utilizing effective German strategies, to which 2 of the 3 of these were designed and described on how to utilize them by me, to which Middle Earth? Russian Fall Back Line? Floating Bridge? 0 of these are authentic original strategies by you. It amazes me how hypocritical you are of me when you fail to keep yourself in check.

    Noher Osten you say? This must be the secret sauce. I’ve been missing. Please subject me further to your entitlement good sir. I would like to know. What is this Noher Osten you speak of? I suspect greatly it is the missing piece of the puzzle to my understanding.

    I would’ve, and frankly I should, but I’m not going to. Trying to convey logic and reasoning to you is a bigger waste of time then trying to explain why communism was destined to fail the moment it began. I sympathize with your thinking, tell you how it can be countered, and all you merely do is tell me what I already know, I dont think that spells out “big ass waste of time” any clearer.

    Also, you should get your childish sarcasm checked out, because nobody here has time for your elementary schooler garbage, we come here to respectfully discuss strategies and connect with each other, not deal with delinquent delusional pricks such as yourself.

    Or you can cowboy up and play a few games. If you really want to get your name out there and be known as the one who solved the biggest conundrum in A&A global for the last half a decade be my guest. I won’t just crush you mercilessly and say your strats are crap after a single game. Dice happen. I will evaluate objectively for it’s own merits. Otherwise words words words that’s all you are is words on paper and words on the internet. You’ll be nothing more than words until you can commit.

    If putting words in my mouth was your goal, than you’ve succeeded in doing so. I have no interest in playing a few games with you, and I never wanted to get my name out there to be known as the person who literally just made a strategy to counter a strategy. You’re alter-ego is absolutely sickening and disgusting to have to see.

    You, crush me? Dude, you can’t achieve what’s absolutely impossible. Even if you wanted to you couldn’t, I dont think you see your bland and absolute crude attitude here but I really hope you dont talk to other people like this because that kind of talk is absolutely inhumane.

    And frankly, all you’ll ever be is a selfish prick that can’t seem to move even an inch outside of your own personal ego thought bubble to which you then proceed to be offended by which I come up with an incredibly simple solution to solving the problem of ‘the allies being unstoppable.’

    You’ve definitely amused me alright. You’ve also proven to me how cocky, hypocritical, and stupid you are. To think I actually considered playing a game of Global 40’ with you.

    I tried to handle this in a civilized manor, I tried to explain my reasoning and logic to you in the most respectful way possible, I at the very least tried for constructive criticism when talking about the points of which you were wrong in. Hell! I even tried to end this whole conversation seeing as you were dragging it completely out of proportion to what this thread was all about! And hah! Who would’ve thought that you just couldn’t help yourself from typing more. One damn post after another, you never seize to stop your bickering about how the Allies can do this and how the Allies can do that at which I’ve already told you I KNOW.

    If there was ever any hostility from my end that made you become so crude and up-tight, I do apologize as it was not my intention for this conversation to go this way, but unfortunately what are you gonna do about the people that just can’t leave it alone, am I right?

    I have nothing against you, and I hope we can come to talk reasonably again soon enough, who knows maybe even fly out to wherever state you live in for a couple games and some good old times of smokin’ and jokin’.

    But for now, you’re not worth my time and engagement with that kind of attitude.

    Until next time, buddy.


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1 said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @Pinch1

    Alright then, that’s the final straw. I’ve tried to be civil about this and have a genuine authentic conversation with you but you’ve let your ignorance get the better of you, and I’m not gonna stand by it.

    Oh now it’s Noher Osten. Your first mention of this Noher Osten was on the second page of posts and its wasn’t explained. You just said, Noher Osten, as if giving it name and adding it to the every growing list of pretend strategies actually means anything.
    First it was Blitzcrieg which isn’t a unique strategy worthy of a name. Its just attack Russia with everything but I’ll humor it. Then the clarification of adding Africa Korps, which also, was a known and very prominent German strategy already. Some would say one of the more effective strategies even.

    Yeah, it’s been Noher Osten. In case you were unaware, that means Middle East, and in case you weren’t paying attention, then again when have you ever done that since the time we’ve been talking, I’ve posted the entirety of what the strategy Noher Osten is all about in the Middle Earth thread. I’ll let you find it for yourself. No, I said it, referring to the thought out strategy at which I made for Germany to counter a Middle Earth tactic, you were just too lazy to actually read the words on the screen at which I posted and instead jumped to conclusions as you usually do and criticized me for basically nothing.

    I have no idea what Blitzcrieg is, you’ll have to tell me allllll about that strategy since I know you just get off on playing the Axis. But I do know what Blitz Krieg is. Lightning War. An incredibly simple strategy at which I didnt even say was new and authentic, since I consistently repeated that it goes as simple as doing what Germany did in real life to counter the annoyance of Russia, but then again why would you have noticed that, you’re oblivious, cocky, and naïve to have actually notice and recognize what other people have to say.

    It sounds to me that you have a personal problem going on of utilizing effective German strategies, to which 2 of the 3 of these were designed and described on how to utilize them by me, to which Middle Earth? Russian Fall Back Line? Floating Bridge? 0 of these are authentic original strategies by you. It amazes me how hypocritical you are of me when you fail to keep yourself in check.

    Noher Osten you say? This must be the secret sauce. I’ve been missing. Please subject me further to your entitlement good sir. I would like to know. What is this Noher Osten you speak of? I suspect greatly it is the missing piece of the puzzle to my understanding.

    I would’ve, and frankly I should, but I’m not going to. Trying to convey logic and reasoning to you is a bigger waste of time then trying to explain why communism was destined to fail the moment it began. I sympathize with your thinking, tell you how it can be countered, and all you merely do is tell me what I already know, I dont think that spells out “big ass waste of time” any clearer.

    Also, you should get your childish sarcasm checked out, because nobody here has time for your elementary schooler garbage, we come here to respectfully discuss strategies and connect with each other, not deal with delinquent delusional pricks such as yourself.

    Or you can cowboy up and play a few games. If you really want to get your name out there and be known as the one who solved the biggest conundrum in A&A global for the last half a decade be my guest. I won’t just crush you mercilessly and say your strats are crap after a single game. Dice happen. I will evaluate objectively for it’s own merits. Otherwise words words words that’s all you are is words on paper and words on the internet. You’ll be nothing more than words until you can commit.

    If putting words in my mouth was your goal, than you’ve succeeded in doing so. I have no interest in playing a few games with you, and I never wanted to get my name out there to be known as the person who literally just made a strategy to counter a strategy. You’re alter-ego is absolutely sickening and disgusting to have to see.

    You, crush me? Dude, you can’t achieve what’s absolutely impossible. Even if you wanted to you couldn’t, I dont think you see your bland and absolute crude attitude here but I really hope you dont talk to other people like this because that kind of talk is absolutely inhumane.

    And frankly, all you’ll ever be is a selfish prick that can’t seem to move even an inch outside of your own personal ego thought bubble to which you then proceed to be offended by which I come up with an incredibly simple solution to solving the problem of ‘the allies being unstoppable.’

    You’ve definitely amused me alright. You’ve also proven to me how cocky, hypocritical, and stupid you are. To think I actually considered playing a game of Global 40’ with you.

    I tried to handle this in a civilized manor, I tried to explain my reasoning and logic to you in the most respectful way possible, I at the very least tried for constructive criticism when talking about the points of which you were wrong in. Hell! I even tried to end this whole conversation seeing as you were dragging it completely out of proportion to what this thread was all about! And hah! Who would’ve thought that you just couldn’t help yourself from typing more. One damn post after another, you never seize to stop your bickering about how the Allies can do this and how the Allies can do that at which I’ve already told you I KNOW.

    If there was ever any hostility from my end that made you become so crude and up-tight, I do apologize as it was not my intention for this conversation to go this way, but unfortunately what are you gonna do about the people that just can’t leave it alone, am I right?

    I have nothing against you, and I hope we can come to talk reasonably again soon enough, who knows maybe even fly out to wherever state you live in for a couple games and some good old times of smokin’ and jokin’.

    But for now, you’re not worth my time and engagement with that kind of attitude.

    Until next time, buddy.

    You sir, were anything but civilized. And frankly, and frankly, and frankly, your prose wreaks of condescension. From the very beginning you act like a know-it-all. Your comments were far more insinuating, crude, offensive and insulting before I ever suggested you were inexperienced. It wasn’t my objective in the beginning. I actually thought there was some method to your madness. Then I realized it was just madness. My last olive branch was to extend an invitation to play a few games. I mean what do you have to lose? When you ran away like a wiener schnitzel I know something was up. You’re just a talker. You didn’t produce anything of value and haven’t the courage to back it up. I began to feel like a fool for entertaining your ideas.

    If you don’t want to play that’s fine. The only joke here is your strategy. Keep up the smokin’ though, its clearly working wonders.


  • @pinch1

    The fact that you call it madness is a joke of itself. It tells me you don’t even see the words you put in your posts. Not to mention the fact that you’re treating a boardgame of pushing plastic pieces like the Ducks Fan watching Monday Night Football, you’ve given me a laugh my man

    And since you’re just all about that common sense, then it should be common sense to you that you clearly may have been acting a bit egotistical to have made me put the foot down.

    I act like I know it all? Dude copying and pasting what I’ve literally described about you doesnt pass the smell test. 😒

    I’m not mad at you, I just feel sorry for you. Sorry for the fact that you can’t even see when others are trying to sympathize with you. You telling me that my actions are far more crude and disrespectful indicates to me that you might not even know the context of those words either.

    You produced nothing of value, you merely copied and pasted what GHG said. Thats what we call in America 'stealing" and ‘disapointing’


  • @thedesertfox said in Countering the Russian Fall Back Line:

    @pinch1

    I act like I know it all? Dude copying and pasting what I’ve literally described about you doesn’t pass the smell test. 😒

    You mean like plagiarizing BlitzKrieg and Africa Korps and passing it off like you came up with a new strategy to beat the current optimal strategy.

    If you feel so sorry for me play me. Teach me. School me sensei. I’m lonely. Misled, and in need of direction. Cleary I need tutelage.


  • This post is deleted!

  • This post is deleted!

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

52
Online

15.8k
Users

37.4k
Topics

1.6m
Posts