Redrum, I didn’t realize you were a Triple-A Developer. I hope you take no offense. I didn’t mean to insult your baby. I appreciate the work you guys have done on Triple-A. As of late, I have found myself playing the AI more often than I would like (as I cannot get my friends together to play often enough). I am confident the AI will continue to improve over time. I guess I should put up or shut up. I ought to be submitting my bug reports to help you guys tweak the game.
Posts made by Ceadda
RE: Alternate Axis Opening
RE: Alternate Axis Opening
Redrum, the AI is better than I gave it credit for, but it is still lousy. I never bothered to complete the first couple games I tried it. Hard AI setting is much more aggresive and effective than the AI for the first A&A computer game (2nd edition - MB Gamemaster version) and it is better than the AI on GTO, but that is not saying much. The AI makes some great moves, but some are just mind-bogglingly stupid. In my most recent game, Germany left the SZ15 DD alone. On UK1, I consolidated it and the Egyptian FTR with the Indian fleet in SZ 34. I brought the UK Australian SS to SZ38 and the TT to SZ 39, baiting Japan to attack the TT with the SZ37 fleet. On J1, the AI took the 2 FTR from SZ37 down to kill the TT. It then moved the BB and CV from 37 northward to SZ59 during NCM causing the 2 FTR to crash into the sea. Kamikaziing one FTR is one thing if you can justify the sacrifice, but there was no sense in taking TWO FTR’s against the TT at all.
RE: List of standard acronyms…noob confused by IPC, IC, FIG, KJF, etc...
I am trying to review some forums games and I was wondering what WLO and TWLO stand for in the combat results?
Here is an example:
Ukr defended wlo 3inf art(2inf art tank ftr Ger remains)
WRu twlo 4inf
RE: Is KBF (Kill Britain First) feasible for the Axis?
I recently played two games of Spring '42 against my cousin. On BOTH occasions, I captured UK on G2 and he conceded. My cousin would be the first to admit that he is a lousy A&A player, but I still took a lot of joy out of silencing his trash talking, even if only for a moment. It NEVER should have succeeded. It was entirely due to poor decisions on his part. Hobbes is absolutely correct. The UK would have to make GRAVE miscalculations (purchasing and combat), and/or have absolutely horrendous luck with the dice. Hobbes gave it in a nutshell. Let me flesh it out a bit for G1 and G2.
Let’s give Germany the MAXIMUM possible force to bring in for a UK invasion on G1 or G2.
G1 assault on UK: German 1 BOM, 2 FTR, 1 ARM, 1 INF versus UK 2 FTR, 1 ARM, 1 ART, 2 INF, 1 BOM, and the AA. Germany has 4% chance to win with 1 ARM or better (in order to capture, the standard OOL is changed)
G2 assault on UK: Let’s assume on R1, Russia went big into WR alone. Germany has all 6 FTR’s intact. On G1, Germany bought 1 CV, 3 TT, 1 ARM, and the SZ8 SS sank the SZ10 US fleet (50% chance). On G2, Germany could bring as much as 1 BOM, 6 FTR, 5 ARM, 5 INF, 1 BB bombardment shot (though the BB would be better used in SZ 9 to interdict/divert the new US1-built fleet hoping to liberate UK on US2. Let’s keep the BB bombarding UK, however, just to give the best possible odds for the Germans in the invasion of UK. With the sz10 fleet eliminated, the G1 naval purchases are placed in the Baltic rather than the Med. The UK player has to see the threat of a G2 invasion bearing down on them. The UK player, not being COMPLETELY inept, decides to shore up UK. UK purchases 5 INF 3 ARM, the SZ1 TT brought the ECan ARM over to UK. The BB stays put in SZ2 as Germany’s 3 SS, 1 DD, 1 CV have a 98.5% chance of wiping out the BB without needing to divert any air units from the invasion. Germany has 1 BOM, 6 FTR, 5 ARM, 5 INF, and the BB bombardment bearing down on UK, who stands with 7 INF, 1 ART, 5 ARM, 3 FTR, 2 BOM (1 FTR 1 BOM from EUS), 1 AA. Germany’s odds of capturing UK under this optimal condition would still be only 24.5%, and the US would be able to liberate on US2. If Germany parks the BB in sz9 to interdict/divert the US, a liberation by the US would be impossible, but the German odds of success at UK drop to 19% without having the bombardment.
Clearly, a G1 attempt is suicide. Assuming the G1 attack succeeded against the SZ10 fleet (50% chance of success) followed by a best case scenario G2 attempt after a G1 build of 1 CV, 3 TT, 1 ARM (19% chance of success while preventing liberation by US). By compounding the probabilities, your chance of a G2 assault of this sort succeeding is less than 10%. If Germany is missing a single FTR from their original 6, the odds are cut in half again.
IF you are playing against a lousy UK player, you might have better luck forgoing the naval build on G1 altogether. Germany can opt to smash the sz2 fleet, and hope the UK will turn around and buy 1 CV, 2 DD (or a similar navy heavy buy) and ignore the Baltic fleet on UK1 (2 big IF’s), allowing Germany to invade UK with 1 BB shot, 2 loaded transports, 6 FTR, and 1 BOM on G2. 83% chance of success without US units on UK. Long story short, unless you are playing inept opponent(s), a G1 or G2 invasion of UK is a suicide mission.
RE: How would you counter this axis strategy ?
First of all, you didn’t explain all of the first round purchases for Germany, just the CV and DD. I think if I was playing in this league:
Russia: I would hammer West Russia leaving 1 INF on Karelia to prevent the blitz, 8 INF 1 ARM 1 FTR (might leave 1 more INF) on Caucasus, and the rest of the front on West Russia. I’d consolidate the 6 INF on the Eastern Front in Buryatia. I’d pull the 4 from Novosibirsk and Evenki back to Russia. The 2 on Kazakh would be part of the stack on Caucasus. The Russian FTR would land on Egypt. For the most part, Russia would thereafter engage in the typical land war with Germany. If the German player bought that much naval force on G1, that is going to make life a bit easier on Russia for the early game.
UK: Due to the UK+6, I would build the IC on India. As for the rest of my build, I would probably go for a second BOM, a CV in SZ 2, or a few land units to begin shoring up UK, just in case things go awry. It would depend on how things went on G1 and the final placement of their air units. The 2 FTR and 1 BOM on UK attack the Baltic fleet. With 2 FTR 1 BOM against 2 DD 1 CV, UK has a 76% to win and keep at least the BOM, which I would land in Caucasus (or West Russia if the FTR’s survived). If the SZ 2 fleet is still afloat, I would drop it down to SZ 12 to attack Algeria and to block in the German BB and TT in the Med. Now, UK is under no immediate threat of a German landing on UK. The Egypt ARM would move east to Persia. The Indian TT would grab the 2 INF from Trans-Jordan and bring them back to India. The 2 Persian INF would walk into India leaving a total of 7 INF there. I’d pull the rest of the Indian fleet down to SZ 38 to merge with the Australian fleet. Normally, I would go to SZ 30 for the merger, but in this case, I would go to SZ 38 to bait the Japanese into attacking the UK fleet. In order to have the odds to succeed, they would need to commit a 3rd or 4th FTR (FIC and/or SZ 50). Japan would no longer pose a serious threat of taking India on J1 and may greatly reduce their threat at Pearl Harbor. If they ignore the fleet and instead attack India to capture the IC, they are going to suffer significant losses, even if they bring in every possible unit (4 INF 4 FTR 1 BOM). They would not get the bombardment with the BB, as the ships are engaging in combat against the transport. They are likely to lose 3 INF 2 FTR (29 IPC’s worth of units) compared to UK’s 21 (forgetting the AA), leaving Japan with only 1 (maybe 2) infantry for the capture. FIC and Kwangtung would likely both be bare, except for possibly any air units landing after the India battle. Likely the Japanese player would want to defend their fleet, so their 2 FTR’s would land on their Indian Carrier. Their BOM may well be stranded alone in FIC or perhaps with 1 extra FTR if Japan got lucky in the India fight. Those air units are tempting targets for a US assault from China as they do not have cannon fodder to chump block for them on defense. Granted, Japan does have the TT in SZ 60 that they COULD ferry 2 units to Kwangtung or FIC, but the transport would then be a sitting duck for the American FTR on China. Assuming Japan succeeded in capturing India, Russia can liberate it with their 2 FTR and the ARM from Caucasus. If the rolls are horrendous for the Russians attempting to liberate India on R2, UK should have little difficulty wiping out the Japanese fleet off of India and recapturing India on UK2. With 1 CC, 1 CV, 1 SS, 2 FTR (possibly up to 4), and (likely) 1 BOM against the Japanese 1 CV, 1 BB, and 2 (or less) FTR UK has a 63% chance of success and likely keeping 2 units. If UK has more FTR’s and/or Japan has less, my odds are that much better. As for the land battle. If UK needs to recapture India, they can bring in 2 INF from Australia and the ARM from Persia. If Japan has 2 INF left on India, UK has an 81% chance to recapture using those 3 units alone. Thereafter, Japan would be in no position to make another attempt on India for some time. IF Russia succeeded in the liberation, things are even better for UK. The ARM on Persia can head eastward and hit FIC along with the 2 INF being transported up from Australia. This would depend on what air units Japan landed there at the end of J1 (and/or any transported units from Japan) as well as any other naval units Japan might have in range that might threaten the TT if left floating alone for a round. Thereafter, I would pump out 3 units every turn in India and the rest at UK, building a couple naval units and then ground units to drop down to SZ12 and thereafter my transports would return to UK for more land units and drop them back off in Algeria on the same turn. If Japan appeared to be threatening a strike upon India again, UK could temporarily suspend Atlantic builds and build more costly units to shore up the Indian defense. However, it will not take long before the US/UK units from Algeria will make their way over to Caucasus or India
USA: My purchases and overall direction would depend greatly upon what Japan brought in to Pearl Harbor on J1. If Japan kept back the SZ 50 CV to aid in the takedown of the UK fleet, the attack on Pearl Harbor would be weak. If the Japanese attack both the UK fleet and India, they would need the BOM to attack India AND the SZ 50 CV pulled back to provide a landing space for the 3rd FTR engaging the UK fleet. Therefore the J1 Pearl Harbor attack would be extremely weak, though it should still certainly succeed. US would easily counter on US1. With one half of the Japanese fleet sunk at Pearl Harbor during US1 and the other half about to be sunk (or already sunk) in the Indian Ocean, Japan would be in a world of hurt and I would go KJF and have several options in how to pursue that course. Assuming the Japanese player goes for a strong Pearl Harbor on J1, Japan would be forgoing the assault on the UK Indian Fleet or India - both are good scenarios for UK. However, if the Japanese pursue the strong Pearl Harbor assault, that portion of the Japanese navy poses no threat to India until J4 at the earliest. Therefore, as the US, I am drawn between the Pacific and the Atlantic options. If Japan didn’t bring in everything possible and/or they had less than stellar results, I may go full-bore KJF. If the Japanese brought in maximum possible force into Pearl Harbor, I would probably turn tail with my TT and BB and head for the Atlantic. If the UK SZ 2 fleet was destroyed, I would drop the US SZ 10 CC down to SZ 12 to block in the German Med fleet and hold back my transports in SZ 10. The DD would pull up to SZ10, merging with my 2 TT and my builds. If the UK SZ 2 fleet survived and made the move down to SZ 12, I would bring over the CC and 2 TT along with 4 ground units from EUS. I would buy 1 CV, 2 TT, 3 INF, 1 ARM. Thereafter, I would primarily focus on doing the quick ferry ride from Algeria back to Eastern Canada, picking up as many land units as I can carry, and returning back to Algeria each turn. UK could do the same by returning to SZ7 to pick up fresh troops and heading back to Algeria all in the same turn. This would protect the joint US/UK fleet from splitting up and being vulnerable to attack by German and/or Japanese air power in Europe. This would keep the African IPC’s pouring into the Allied coffers, as well as maintain significant threat to Western Europe and Southern Europe (once the German Med fleet is eliminated). Germany would need to hold back more units from the front line, further easing the burden on Russia. US and UK can keep this up and march their tanks and men across northern Africa into the middle east and up to Caucasus or Asia. With the German naval build on G1, that is one more turn for US and UK to get boots on the ground and over to the front. At the drop of a hat, the UK, followed by the US, could switch up the plan and invade Western or Southern Europe when they are ready.
Edit: I guess I didn’t address part of the Japanese strategy that you mentioned. If Japan totally ignores both navies and simply builds the two IC’s and makes the tank rush for Moscow, UK would certainly deter the progress with the IC on India. As the USA, I would probably shore up the defense of Buryatia’s 6 Russian INF with a couple US FTR’s (China & Hawaii) and build bombers ASAP to land in Buryatia and strategic bomb the Japanese IC’s. Granted, the most I could do would be 12 IPC’s of damage between the 2 mainland IC’s. However, that coupled with the UK builds in India should quickly slow the Japanese tank rush to a crawl at best. I will need to crunch the numbers later for specific battle stats to run out the likely progress.
Anyhow, it’s getting late and I think I have written enough for you to get the gist of most of my plan to counter that scenario. If I miswrote something, I’ll correct my post later. In my play group, we play straight OOB rules without a bid. If I had a UK+6, this is what I think I would pursue. Please tell me what you guys think of this allied strategy.
RE: British Pacific Opening Moves
I still debate the whole British IC on India with myself. With that said, over half the time, it never works out well.
I have had mixed feelings about an Indian IC, as well. I used to employ the strategy often, but I usually avoid it nowadays. However, even if the IC should happen to fall into Japanese hands, that doesn’t NECESSARILY mean that it was a bad strategy to pursue. Japan may be delayed from pushing toward Moscow by their pursuit of capturing and holding India. This may give Russia a bit of breathing room for a bit longer. That said, I usually prefer to invest UK’s wealth into liberating/securing Africa and bringing the fight to Germany ASAP via the Atlantic theater.
RE: British Pacific Opening Moves
My opponent overreacted and rolled poorly so take this with a large grain of salt - but this whole scenario was made possible by redeployment of the Brit navy off Australia. I’d say realistically he should have won the navy fight 6 or 7 times out of 10, but didnt.
You got extremely lucky. If the fighter from Egypt has survived G1 and joins the UK fleet, Japan still has 86% odds of winning if it attacks with 4 fighters, 1 carrier and 1 battleship. Otherwise Japanese odds are 98%.
Hobbes, I recently posted a new thread with a slight variant of this strategy. I would love to get your opinion on the concept:
Possible Russian/UK Opening
With this strategy, the Japanese only have a 32% chance to eliminate the combined UK fleet in SZ 30 unless they choose to greatly diminish (or forgo altogether) their J1 Pearl Harbor attack. What do you think?
In the forums here and at GTO, I have often read that the general consensus is that the allies had the advantage in Revised, but the axis have the advantage in Spring 1942. I read of leagues where every game started with an allies +6 bid. Everyone I play with (offline) feels the allies have the advantage in both, with the exception of one friend who feels the axis have the advantage in Revised. I have begun to warm up to the axis in Spring 1942 lately, but I don’t know that I would go so far as to say they have the advantage. In my circle of family and friends, I am the most experienced A&A player. I know I ought to expand my horizons and play against some better players, thereby giving me the opportunity to learn more. Regardless, here is my question:
Do you think the Axis truly have a real advantage in a casual game without a fixed time limit, or is it only an advantage in a tournament setting with victory cities being the first deciding factor? I see it as clearly possible, if not probable, that the axis grab India and/or Karelia without losing any of their VC’s and time runs out, even if the allies are stronger militarily. The allies could be positioned to trounce the axis in the following round or two, yet lose because the axis hold 7 or 8 VC.
What are your opinions on the matter?
If you feel the axis have the advantage even in a long game, please explain why (perhaps citing a bit of your typical strategy). And please, let’s avoid the sarcastic joke strategies that have plagued some threads.
RE: Alternate Axis Opening
Redrum, the current AI was what I am talking about…engine 184.108.40.206 game version 2.8. In fact, I just started another game playing as the allies. On G1, the AI left Western Europe totally bare again. The AI even pulled the AA off also. What is even more pathetic is that the AI didn’t even advance the AA from Germany eastward. 2 AA were left sitting on the German capital at the end of G1.
Playing the AI is pointless unless you want to test out an extremely high-risk/high-reward strategy, and you simply need the AI to dice you in the key battle(s) that your strategy hinges upon, and thereby teach you to play more conservatively.
RE: Alternate Axis Opening
Unless you are playing against the woefully inept AI on Triple-A (as GTO is currently not even an option - not that it’s AI was wonderful either) or a similarly, woefully inept human opponent, Japan stands no realistic chance of capturing WUS within a short time frame. If you ARE playing against the AI, then virtually anything is possible. The last time I played the Triple-A AI, the AI left WEur bare at the end of G1, I captured it on UK1, and the Ger AI never attempted to take it back. If you captured Hawaii, Alaska, and China, the US would be at 37 IPC, not 38, so I assume the US opponent probably captured Algeria from Germany. Regardless, if Japan and the US are at an IPC parity of 38-38, the advantage goes to the US unless the Japanese already have a significant material advantage. Japan has no chance to take the WUS by surprise. They are telegraphing their intent to strike the WUS at least one turn in advance due to the travel involved, giving the US a turn to build up their defenses. Even if the US had been focusing their efforts solely in the Atlantic theater and all of their available units were in EUS or ECan, they could drop 2 tanks and 8 infantry on WUS before Japan could get there as well as bring any tanks or air units from EUS or ECan. Impossible for Japan to succeed, certainly not. However, it is highly unlikely to be successful against any decent US player.