What is the donation goal? I can potentially support more if you need.
Posts made by Boston_NWO
-
RE: 🎖 Axis & Allies .org 2022 Support Drive
-
RE: Japan R1 attack on pearl harbor
@moonzar said in Japan R1 attack on pearl harbor:
@aardvarkpepper Sorry I meant, I lost my fleet in East indies and I still went ahead doing pearl harbor. I ended up with nothing left in the pacific and got KJF.
I basically learn… That when you lost east indies from UK, should have bought fleet in R1 immediately, probably 3-4 subs to prepare for KJF. Also shouldn’t do Pearl in the future, if I lost my East Indies fleet.
Make sense? :)
Thanks!
Makes complete sense to me. Good luck on your future games, I am sure you will improve quickly asking questions and trying different play
Here is a discord channel with many helpful and good players if you would like to join
https://discord.gg/j5NQUaa6 -
RE: Japan R1 attack on pearl harbor
I agree that a deep understanding is better, but that takes a lot of effort. Knowing what good players are doing and copying that is a solid way of quickly improving while also reverse engineering the understanding of mechanics over time.
This season, I haven’t attacked pearl harbor once (25 games) despite all kinds of opponent actions. Not claiming I am the best axis player, but I’ve done well enough that I think my advice is useful.
-
RE: Japan R1 attack on pearl harbor
Quintin is a strong player and provides a good menu of alternative evaluations on pearl. Even 5 seasons in among strong players, there remains disagreement about the very best move.
The only cases where you should clearly not do Pearl is if UK attacks borneo, Russia places 5 infantry in buryatia, or some similar level of UK aggression where Japan has use the starting units to great effect. In this scenario, attacking pearl as well overstretches Japan’s navy.
-
RE: Japan R1 attack on pearl harbor
@moonzar Yep ground battles. These are small but guaranteed profits. The big reason why hitting USA pearl isn’t as good as it seems is that the USA navy units are so out of position. It’s round 4 until they’re useful in Europe, and often times Allies end up with more navy than they need (other than transports). In contrast, Japan’s air is immediately useful in rounds 1-3 making additional profit with each battle.
1 bomber to burytania
2-3 fighters to Anhwei
1-2 fighters Burma
1-2 fighters Yunnan
fighters if UK tries to take borneo, New Guinea, or otherwise leaves units exposed -
RE: Japan R1 attack on pearl harbor
I don’t attack Pearl Harbor any more, in any situation. the profit is minimal and there is a surprisingly large opportunity cost.
-
RE: How to play UK
William, I think that’s a reasonable play and a coherent strategy. I wanted to point out a couple variations.
- You are right that the UK India navy position is untenable. Other than sacrificing it round 1, UK can sail it around Africa to reach France by Round 4 - perfectly timed for when Allies have a peak power advantage on Germany.
- Japan can completely ignore India and move directly on China. Playing as Axis, I do this the vast majority of my games unless UK plays in a way that loses India Round 3. Japan can cluster the fleet at sz61, avoiding the UK fighter pressure.
- Most of the strongest UK players prioritize creating a UK fleet round 1. this is because the UK navy applies threat to 6 Germany territories (7 if you count Karelia). A fleet with transports also activates the existing UK units at the capital. 1 carrier, 1 destroyer, 3 infantry allows UK to create a navy round 1 while also placing maximum units in India.
-
RE: No More Lane Rolling
Yup, apparently not; think you were right on this point.
I read through Julius’s post and see that they are fixing lane rolling. Drag and drop units should also be nice! -
RE: No More Lane Rolling
@aardvarkpepper Agreed, there’s a real mathematical difference. Beamdog made a game design choice that asynchronous play is an essential product feature of the online version. Defense profiles and lane rolling are aspects that are motivated from this product decision.
Whoops, I just realized that I replied to a thread that’s 2 years old. sorry about that!
-
RE: No More Lane Rolling
@djensen I don’t follow why you perceive that there’s lane rolling. The online implementation is equivalent to rolling all dice at once since the defender’s defense profile is set as soon as the defender clicks to complete their turn. A click pause between each level of rolling is simply a game flourish to build suspense.
Ah, I can see what you mean with how the attacker gets to choose the losses at each loss stage. It’s not the same as Triplea or the board game, but I honestly haven’t noticed a difference in my games. 99.9% of the time the order of loss is aa -> inf -> bomber -> art -> tank -> fig. Navy is sub -> dest -> car -> cru -> fig. There are some caveats, but I perceive the difference between selecting losses by lane vs knowing the entire round hits to be a minor effect. It has the effect of slightly disadvantaging the attacker since the attacker must make decisions prior to knowing the full hit information. On the balancing side, the defender has to select a defensive profile prior to the subsequent round of battles.
-
RE: Why Sealion Doesn't Work (Maybe) (edit - in 1942 Online)
I agree that the video is a low blow.
Aardvark, your posts are so long and meandering that it is difficult to engage in this format. Maybe in a discussion or actual play game, your views would be clearer.
Principles, logic, and math are all useful towards the goal of becoming a stronger Axis and Allies player. But these hypotheses are empirically tested through actual games and whether it leads to better outcomes and more wins. Quintin and I generally aren’t commenting with the same degree of specificity as you are. Such detail distracts from the main insight.
Back to the original topic. Germany “sealion” attempting to take UK capital early (rounds 2-4) is a weak strategy that has a low axis win rate. This is because germany pays a high opportunity cost of less pressure on Russia and because Allies can powerfully repel this line. Starting with buying 8 inf into UK round 1 and following up with merging us and UK fleets round 3. By round, germany’s fleet is dead barring extraordinary circumstances.
-
RE: Why Sealion Doesn't Work (Maybe) (edit - in 1942 Online)
The ranking are competitive and the high ranked player win far more they lose to get there. And these players overwhelmingly do not build naval units in the Baltic round 1. This should give anyone interested in winning pause about whether it is a good line of play. Maybe someone can innovate in a way that shows a large body of evidence wrong, but strong claims require strong evidence.
The Baltic round 1 buy is problematic because Germany has extremely strong and reliable lines with a standard 11 inf 2 art buy that reliably can take Russia by round 9. By investing in the Baltic, Germany gives up this valuable opportunity.
Second, UK has simple strong counter play to prevent a decisive win. This is an 10 infantry buy with 7 or 8 placed in the UK. This ensures over 99% safety of UK round 2. With USA navy buy round 1, it is nearly guaranteed that allies have a navy around UK by round 3.
By going Baltic round 1, Germany does an all-in where it must capture UK quickly to have a good chance of winning. This goal is easily frustrated by a reliable response that does not depend on luck.
-
RE: How to play UK
@domanmacgee i want to point out that in about 60 percent of my games as axis I dont take india as japan until round 8 or later. Often Moscow falls before India does in my games. Build a factory and infantry push to moscow, and Allies are stuck with 10-20 units in india doing absolutely nothing.
India is this shiny object for many intermediate Japan players. It is a very risky play. The round 3 timing is the strongest point and even then favors Allies by 3-4 units. As Japan, I wait for an allies mistake like overextending africa, misposition russia, misposition uk fighterd before I even consider
-
RE: When to buy subs in the pacific and best strategy to use them
Subs are by far the most cost efficient naval attack purchase. Surprisingly, they do okay in defense as well since hit points are so important. Japan should only buy subs if usa purchases pacific naval units round one. Since subs have more attack than defense, the usual dynamic is that two fleets are 3 spaces apart. The stronger navy will try to move to two spaces, either through enough defensive strength or with destroyer blockers. The other side has the choice of building up defense, countering similarly with blockers, or retreating.
3 transports, 3 infantry is an all around flexible and powerful round 1 purchase. If UK attacks japan sz37, this strongly suggests KJF and a buy of 1 trans, 3 sub 1 inf might be more appropriate.
-
RE: Russian Openings and AA Online
@brian-cannon I think the key is for Germany to stack ukr, trade cauc, and prevent russia from stacking cauc. Russia is forced to trade karelia and cauc. Russia will want to trade belorussia. Russia can’t afford to stack karelia because germany will move into Caucasus. This 3 territory trading, especially if germany leaves more than 1 inf in karelia and cauc will quickly exhaust Russia.
Germany buys max infantry every round and allows uk to trade france & northwest europe. Germany shouldn’t overcommit to defending western europe. Focus resources on pushing to moscow. Once Cauc is stacked, winning is within sight.
-
RE: Russian Openings and AA Online
As Quintin said, 9 units to Ukraine, 12 units to west Russia. On both battles, essentially attack until all units of one side are dead and avoid retreating. This takes a lot of russian and germany units off the table, simplifying the game space and working towards allies objective of weakening Germany.
21 units to wrus only is playable, but the consensus is it’s not as strong. It leaves Germany stronger with more options to maintain africa income and block UK/US from applying serious pressure. Only wrus is most compatible with a KJF style.
1 fighter landing in sinkiang is unnecessary. I am not aware of any strong player who does this with a Russia fighter.
-
RE: Comparison of Steam1942 versus TripleA
I came from playing a ton on Triplea, so I had a similar feeling to you initially. After playing the steam version for 5-10 hours, I became used to the interface and actually prefer it in some ways.
The big advantage of the steam version is a ranking system that holds players accountable to finishing games. I got really tired of playing players of far lower play level or ghosting when I was ahead.
-
RE: Starting to lose my mind with this game
Doesn’t help that the animation exaggerates hits over non hits.
-
RE: Crazy game: Should be titled when the dice reward stupid behavior, expect it.
@Brian-Cannon Germany in kgf can reliably hold two territories. You usually want to hold berlin and the other is your choice. Trade efficiently with 5 fighters so there’s minimal units in traded territories.
Play for averages. If the dice are too extreme, you take the loss. But good play increases the likelihood of winning.
-
RE: Crazy game: Should be titled when the dice reward stupid behavior, expect it.
USA bombers in particular are a surprisingly effective strategy. It takes the right mentality of leveraging allies higher income to trade with Germany. Completely naked air attacks need a little luck as well, which he apparently got.